AARoads Forum

I just learned that 4 states ban billboards: Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, and Vermont. Billboards are ugly and they can distract drivers. And with the abundance of advertising space that can now be had on the internet, they are not really necessary anymore. Is there any reason, besides lobbying from billboard owners, other states haven't done it?

Is there a reason to ban aside from nominal aesthetic?

But how else can you annoy half the drivers on the road with a giant, bullshit political message?

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 29, 2022, 10:10:44 AM
Is there a reason to ban aside from nominal aesthetic?

Rubbernecking

Quote from: kernals12 on July 29, 2022, 10:59:15 AM

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 29, 2022, 10:10:44 AM
Is there a reason to ban aside from nominal aesthetic?

Rubbernecking

Okay, but is there any substantial data to show that billboards lead to an increase in accidents or traffic delays?  I can see a better case for those potentially being made on limited access roads but probably not other more conventional kinds of highways.

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2022/04/21/supreme-court-upholds-austin-ban-digital-billboards/7402483001/
90% of all cities in Texas have billboard bans. I have to imagine Lady Bird Johnson had a role in that.

Quote from: kernals12 on July 29, 2022, 11:13:34 AM
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2022/04/21/supreme-court-upholds-austin-ban-digital-billboards/7402483001/
90% of all cities in Texas have billboard bans. I have to imagine Lady Bird Johnson had a role in that.

Any link to the data Austin was using an argument in their court case?  The article reads more along the lines of first world Austin problems than being about actual safety. 

I'm not in favor of banning things unless they're shown to be a true safety concern.

A better strategy is to diminish their value naturally through online advertising and those blue signs that are in advance of exits.

Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on July 29, 2022, 11:22:51 AM
I'm not in favor of banning things unless they're shown to be a true safety concern.

A better strategy is to diminish their value naturally through online advertising and those blue signs that are in advance of exits.

https://www.scenic.org/sign-control/digital-billboards/swedish-digital-billboard-study/

Quote from: NWI_Irish96 on July 29, 2022, 11:22:51 AM
(http://i'm%20not%20in%20favor%20of%20banning%20things%20unless%20they're%20shown%20to%20be%20a%20true%20safety%20concern.)

Couldn't have articulated my thoughts on the matter better myself.  I don't particularly care for billboards, but in some limited instances (especially off freeway) they can be useful.  I see no need to ban something unless there is some value more weighty than aesthetics.

Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" . 

I loved the old non-PC billboards for South of the Border. They were funny. Made a boring drive more interesting. The new ones are not entertaining.

I am puzzled, however, by the OP's reference to Internet advertising as a substitute for billboards. How is a responsible driver supposed to be viewing Internet advertising while driving? I understand the primary purpose of a billboard as being to induce you to stop at an upcoming business/tourist trap/whatever that you otherwise might not have known about. Seeing Internet advertising at home before you leave seems like a poor substitute for that sort of thing because you're unlikely to be examining what's available at every exit on your trip.

I do find gas station billboards useless, especially because a lot of them reflect the annoying fad of not listing the prices for all the available grades.

(With that said, I certainly concede that long strings of billboards can get ugly. I-75 in Georgia comes to mind. But I don't view that alone as being reason to ban them.)

Advertising is just a combination of panhandling and vandalism that we agree is OK because rich people are doing it.

The only billboards I've ever found to be useful are the ones telling you about services (food, fuel, etc.) at an exit/junction somewhere down the road. Outside of that, they're garbage.

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" .

The MBTA put up a billboard on I-95 in Burlington telling commuters to beat the traffic by riding on a rail line that doesn't exist.

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.

(https://i.imgur.com/nquIgE0.jpg)

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" .

You really gotta know where the gentleman's club is?

Quote from: kernals12 on July 29, 2022, 09:32:36 AM
Billboards are ugly and they can distract drivers. And with the abundance of advertising space that can now be had on the internet, they are not really necessary anymore.

It's probably much safer to look at the billboard than your cell phone when you're trying to find that Cracker Barrel.

I don't get the ones that are for non-travel-related products. Like insurance. "Oh honey, let's pull off at the next exit. I think we need to update your life insurance policy."

Quote from: GaryV on July 29, 2022, 02:08:11 PM
....

I don't get the ones that are for non-travel-related products. Like insurance. "Oh honey, let's pull off at the next exit. I think we need to update your life insurance policy."

Stuff that is not travel-related per se but that is not available in a nearby state could be a reason (fireworks or firecrackers are the obvious thing that come to mind).

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" . 

I agree, except billboards with moving images should be regulated, since they actually can distract motorists.

Billboards can enhance the aesthetics of a landscape by providing visual stimulation. In that vein, they can help stave off driver fatigue and thus have a safety benefit.

I'm really tired of puritanical aesthetics police.  Beauty must be in the eye of the individual beholder if individuals are to have any mental autonomy at all.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 12:01:23 PM
Advertising is just a combination of panhandling and vandalism that we agree is OK because rich people are doing it.

One person's art is another person's vandalism.

Quote from: Ned Weasel on July 29, 2022, 06:35:59 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is “ugly”. 

I agree, except billboards with moving images should be regulated, since they actually can distract motorists.

Long before we worry about anything fixed and off the road, I want to regulate those horribly bright electronic billboard type ads you sometimes see on box trucks. I hate those with a burning passion. Not only are they super annoying and distracting, but they blind everyone else on the road, especially if it's foggy out.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 01:03:53 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.

(https://i.imgur.com/nquIgE0.jpg)

Quote from: Rothman on July 29, 2022, 01:10:19 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" .

You really gotta know where the gentleman's club is?

Don't forget which one of three popular light beers are The Choice of the current city you're visiting.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 12:01:23 PM
Advertising is just a combination of panhandling and vandalism that we agree is OK because rich people are doing it.

I don't think anyone has a right to my eyeballs, and I'm kind of surprised that there are people in this thread that disagree.

Quote from: Ned Weasel on July 29, 2022, 06:35:59 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" . 

I agree, except billboards with moving images should be regulated, since they actually can distract motorists.

Billboards can enhance the aesthetics of a landscape by providing visual stimulation. In that vein, they can help stave off driver fatigue and thus have a safety benefit.

I'm really tired of puritanical aesthetics police.  Beauty must be in the eye of the individual beholder if individuals are to have any mental autonomy at all.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 12:01:23 PM
Advertising is just a combination of panhandling and vandalism that we agree is OK because rich people are doing it.

One person's art is another person's vandalism.

I've done art, and I've done advertising.

Advertising isn't art.

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.  The safety argument is silly, and people should not get to tell other people how to use their property because they think the use is "ugly" .

I don't think I can get erectile dysfunction treatment while I drive... even if there's five billboards that tell me where I can get it.
Also, is knowing that there's a Lion's Den 50 miles south of Kankakee off of I-57 really "useful" or "needed"?

The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

This would be why they aren't banned.

Quote from: plain on July 29, 2022, 12:45:25 PM
The only billboards I've ever found to be useful are the ones telling you about services (food, fuel, etc.) at an exit/junction somewhere down the road. Outside of that, they're garbage.

This. I could care less about law firm advertisements, or that there's a Buc-ees 552 miles down the road (https://goo.gl/maps/y9FSx7dU2s3bLxgu8).

• They are not funded by your Taxes.
• They are not Gantry Signs. They are not above you. They are way over there.
• They are not in your "Back Yard".
• Shame on you for banning Beautiful Neon Signs. And now they Cancel Billboards?!
• Web Sites Are Ugly. Smart Phones Are Ugly. JQUERY Is Ugly. Paywall Is Ugly. Cheap Commercials Are Ugly. Canceling Billboards does not make it go away.
• These are valid reasons to keep Billboards. However, my reasons are not "Stylish". They are not "Trending". Button Copy is not either. That does not make it wrong.

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

Yet they are regulated in many states.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 08:17:49 PM
I've done art, and I've done advertising.

Advertising isn't art.

https://www.artsy.net/artist-series/andy-warhol-advertisements

An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them. That said, as previously mentioned, I have no issue with billboards advertising food/fuel/services that may be a bit further away.

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

Billboard ideas:

• The lawyers on the next billboard will take 80% of what you receive, even if you do win
• Drink and drive – you're more likely to survive than the passenger next to you
• Speed limit 55 ahead – strictly enforced in Example County, in 6 miles
• Checkerboard perfectly reflective mirror and see-through, meant to distract

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

Is someone putting a picture of a giant dong up on billboard somewhere?

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 30, 2022, 08:40:35 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

Is someone putting a picture of a giant dong up on billboard somewhere?

See Cobra Kai.

Quote from: Rothman on July 30, 2022, 08:44:12 AM

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on July 30, 2022, 08:40:35 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

Is someone putting a picture of a giant dong up on billboard somewhere?

See Cobra Kai.

I thought that might be a Cobra Kai reference somehow, but I wasn't sure.

Advertising takes different forms to get the message across, much of it subconsciously. You may not care about certain billboard advertisements...but you remembered the ads. You may not care about life insurance at that very moment, or erectile dysfunction treatments, but the thought of those products are now in your brain if you do. A breakfast billboard at 1pm won't produce a sale of that item that day, but the brand is in your mind for your next meal.

Art is very subjective - no doubt many people have been to certain art museums, but not *every* art museum. Most companies use different ads to appeal to different people.

Whenever I see a study from a safety institute, it might as well be trashed. They clearly will be pushing an agenda. Even more so when they compare one country to another random country. There's 200 someodd countries.  Why compare one to another in a different part of the world, rather than, say, a country with a common border?

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Outdoor advertising is just 2.5% of all ad spending

https://www.scenic.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/scenic20america20billboard20fact20sheet1.pdf

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM
Advertising takes different forms to get the message across, much of it subconsciously. You may not care about certain billboard advertisements...but you remembered the ads. You may not care about life insurance at that very moment, or erectile dysfunction treatments, but the thought of those products are now in your brain if you do. A breakfast billboard at 1pm won't produce a sale of that item that day, but the brand is in your mind for your next meal.

Art is very subjective - no doubt many people have been to certain art museums, but not *every* art museum. Most companies use different ads to appeal to different people.

Whenever I see a study from a safety institute, it might as well be trashed. They clearly will be pushing an agenda. Even more so when they compare one country to another random country. There's 200 someodd countries.  Why compare one to another in a different part of the world, rather than, say, a country with a common border?

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Not always, and not on every highway. Some have them, but with no listings. Some have listings that need to be updated.

I think advertising control on Interstates (conceptually a bit broader than just a billboard ban) has been a success.  I actually support removing all grandfathered billboards on Interstates and extending the same form of control to all freeways.  It is on surface roads where matters become more complex.  Ghost signs are increasingly deemed worthy of historic preservation, and some advertising displays have become regarded as cultural fixtures (e.g., the billboards, painted barn roofs, etc. on US 66 pointing the way to Meramec Caverns in Missouri).

In regard to the First Amendment and private property rights, it is well-established law that nuisances--including billboards--are subject to legal control.

Quote from: US 89 on July 29, 2022, 06:55:26 PMLong before we worry about anything fixed and off the road, I want to regulate those horribly bright electronic billboard type ads you sometimes see on box trucks. I hate those with a burning passion. Not only are they super annoying and distracting, but they blind everyone else on the road, especially if it's foggy out.

I would ban them outright.  I also support stringent regulations on fixed digital billboards where they are permitted, which would not be on freeways.

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 12:40:07 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM...They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Not always, and not on every highway. Some have them, but with no listings. Some have listings that need to be updated.

Repeating my above statement...They're not free,  and DOT is not responsible for listing all restaurants. It is a voluntary program for restaurants to buy space on the sign.

What states don't use the signage?

Quote from: Ned Weasel on July 30, 2022, 06:24:43 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 08:17:49 PM
I've done art, and I've done advertising.

Advertising isn't art.

https://www.artsy.net/artist-series/andy-warhol-advertisements

That's art, not advertising. Warhol made some neat looking stuff, but I don't think any of it actually sold anything.

Look, if art and advertising are the same thing, why is it that I'm competent enough at art to get paid a reasonable sum to do it, but I'm so abysmal at advertising that I've lost vast sums of money doing it?

Here are the differences between the two, that I've learned from experience:

Art
- A form of expression. One normally creates art for the sake of creating art.
- You cannot succeed or fail at art, as it is subjective. Even if a piece has severe technical flaws someone may love it all the same.
- Art is generally open to interpretation. The artist may intend meaning X but the audience perceives meaning Y. This is generally considered to be okay or even desirable. In fact, the most badly-received art is when it overtly tries to get you to feel a certain way but can't actually pull it off (e.g. a stand-up comedian who isn't funny, a tearjerker movie that isn't actually sad).

Advertising
- A means to an end. That is, advertising is created for one purpose only–to increase income of the organization creating it.
- You sure as hell can fail at advertising. If your ad spend exceeds the increase in sales, the advertising campaign has objectively failed.
- Advertising is generally shooting for the narrowest interpretation possible. At a base level, if you intend to communicate "2 for $5" and the customer interprets "5 for $2" you have a problem. Even outside of the specific case like that, most of advertising is actually applied psychology. You want to get the customer feeling nostalgic so they buy your old-style toaster, you want them to feel anxious about their family's safety so they buy an alarm system, you want them to feel like they'll make a difference in the world if they buy your shoes made from recycled ocean plastic.

Now, some elements of an advertisement can be art. I don't think it would be correct to say that the logo design work of Paul Rand isn't art. But the sum of what ends up on a billboard? Very distinct from art.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 02:14:54 PM

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 12:40:07 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM...They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Not always, and not on every highway. Some have them, but with no listings. Some have listings that need to be updated.

Repeating my above statement...They're not free,  and DOT is not responsible for listing all restaurants. It is a voluntary program for restaurants to buy space on the sign.

What states don't use the signage?

So if businesses really want to get noticed, they either lease the space on the signs from the DOT or pay for billboards.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 01:03:53 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.

(https://i.imgur.com/nquIgE0.jpg)

This series of billboards were the first thing that came to mind when opening this thread. 

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 30, 2022, 04:23:08 PM
This series of billboards were the first thing that came to mind when opening this thread. 

When I got home from Louisiana, not knowing any better as an out-of-state visitor, I had to Google the guy out of sheer intellectual curiosity to see what business he was even in. I won't spoil it for anyone else (our facetious running theory, based on the oddly non-specific slogans used, was that he was a sex worker), but it's certainly not something where you would make a decision on the basis of sheer impulse while on the road.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2022, 04:46:00 PM
I won't spoil it for anyone else (our facetious running theory, based on the oddly non-specific slogans used, was that he was a sex worker), but it's certainly not something where you would make a decision on the basis of sheer impulse while on the road.

^ True, but it does make his name familiar. That gives him a leg up on his competitors (or cut into their edge from their own advertising), should you ever need services of the kind he offers.

People in his profession need to be careful about what they promise in their ads, thus his minimal promise that his office will at least return your phone calls. (But there's no phone number on the billboard, not even an easy-to-remember toll-free number. Maybe on one of his other billboards.)

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2022, 04:46:00 PMWhen I got home from Louisiana, not knowing any better as an out-of-state visitor, I had to Google the guy out of sheer intellectual curiosity to see what business he was even in. I won't spoil it for anyone else (our facetious running theory, based on the oddly non-specific slogans used, was that he was a sex worker), but it's certainly not something where you would make a decision on the basis of sheer impulse while on the road.

I Googled him and found him to be in precisely the profession, but not the subspecialty of it, that I was expecting.  And yes, there's definitely a Magic Mike or American Gigolo vibe about that shot.

Quote from: oscar on July 30, 2022, 05:35:26 PM
^ True, but it does make his name familiar. That gives him a leg up on his competitors (or cut into their edge from their own advertising), should you ever need services of the kind he offers.

People in his profession need to be careful about what they promise in their ads, thus his minimal promise that his office will at least return your phone calls. (But there's no phone number on the billboard, not even an easy-to-remember toll-free number. Maybe on one of his other billboards.)

You make a good point about his reasons for the vagueness of his billboards. I had assumed that Mr. Bart was banking on people doing what I did (looking him up to satisfy their curiosity as to his profession). I had never considered that Mr. Bart was in a profession where he could give his all to the client, yet still come up short through no fault of his own, ultimately leaving the client unsatisfied at the end of the day.

Effectiveness of his chosen marketing strategy aside, though, his omnipresence on Louisiana billboards somewhat undermines the argument that billboards are an essential service to travelers.

Quote from: oscar on July 30, 2022, 05:35:26 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2022, 04:46:00 PM
I won't spoil it for anyone else (our facetious running theory, based on the oddly non-specific slogans used, was that he was a sex worker), but it's certainly not something where you would make a decision on the basis of sheer impulse while on the road.

^ True, but it does make his name familiar. That gives him a leg up on his competitors (or cut into their edge from their own advertising), should you ever need services of the kind he offers.

People in his profession need to be careful about what they promise in their ads, thus his minimal promise that his office will at least return your phone calls. (But there's no phone number on the billboard, not even an easy-to-remember toll-free number. Maybe on one of his other billboards.)

Furthermore, sometimes they borrow the fame of one attorney to pitch for a more local law firm. Throughout Alabama, the likeness of Alexander Shunnarah can be found on every fourth billboard, where there's some small print explaining which firm might pick up the phone call or provide representation.

After the beer, law firm, and strip clubs are accounted for, it's probably insurance, banks, HVAC repair, dealerships, gas stations, restaurants, and hotels rounding out the top ten.

Quote from: formulanone on July 30, 2022, 06:15:24 PM

Quote from: oscar on July 30, 2022, 05:35:26 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2022, 04:46:00 PM
I won't spoil it for anyone else (our facetious running theory, based on the oddly non-specific slogans used, was that he was a sex worker), but it's certainly not something where you would make a decision on the basis of sheer impulse while on the road.

^ True, but it does make his name familiar. That gives him a leg up on his competitors (or cut into their edge from their own advertising), should you ever need services of the kind he offers.

People in his profession need to be careful about what they promise in their ads, thus his minimal promise that his office will at least return your phone calls. (But there's no phone number on the billboard, not even an easy-to-remember toll-free number. Maybe on one of his other billboards.)

Furthermore, sometimes they borrow the fame of one [colleague of Morris Bart] to pitch for a more local [colleague of Morris Bart]. Throughout Alabama, the likeness of Alexander Shunnarah can be found on every fourth billboard, where there's some small print explaining which firm might pick up the phone call or provide [services].

Aw, man, you ruined the air of mystery we had going. :-D

Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

No, to quote George Carlin,"..no woman is this stupid."

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 01:03:53 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.

(https://i.imgur.com/nquIgE0.jpg)

Lawyer ads yes I see this in my area too.

In MN and western WI we've been spammed by ads for Nicolet Law, featuring a cartoon head of the attorney at law with a massive beard and sunglasses with pine trees reflected in the lenses.

Oh, and Kris Lindahl, the real estate guy, who recently filed for a trademark for his horizontally-extended arms pose.

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 30, 2022, 08:21:20 PM

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

No, to quote George Carlin,"..no woman is this stupid."

:eyebrow:

Quote from: J N Winkler on July 30, 2022, 01:56:04 PM
I think advertising control on Interstates (conceptually a bit broader than just a billboard ban) has been a success.  I actually support removing all grandfathered billboards on Interstates and extending the same form of control to all freeways.  It is on surface roads where matters become more complex.  Ghost signs are increasingly deemed worthy of historic preservation, and some advertising displays have become regarded as cultural fixtures (e.g., the billboards, painted barn roofs, etc. on US 66 pointing the way to Meramec Caverns in Missouri).

In regard to the First Amendment and private property rights, it is well-established law that nuisances--including billboards--are subject to legal control.

Quote from: US 89 on July 29, 2022, 06:55:26 PMLong before we worry about anything fixed and off the road, I want to regulate those horribly bright electronic billboard type ads you sometimes see on box trucks. I hate those with a burning passion. Not only are they super annoying and distracting, but they blind everyone else on the road, especially if it's foggy out.

I would ban them outright.  I also support stringent regulations on fixed digital billboards where they are permitted, which would not be on freeways.

So if I'm lucky enough to own a piece of land next to a busy freeway, but unlucky enough for it not to be an an interchange, and I decide to build a barn on it, that's fine. But if I paint "See Rock City" or "Chew Mail Pouch Tobacco -- Treat Yourself to the Best" then it becomes a nuisance?

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

I've seen many billboards with at least one female lawyer. A few with most or all of the lawyers female, including at least one featuring attractive female lawyers for a firm specializing in defending male clients in divorce cases. (Yeah, as if any of those clients have any chance at all for getting anything more than legal services from those women.)

Quote from: hbelkins on July 31, 2022, 12:03:31 AMSo if I'm lucky enough to own a piece of land next to a busy freeway, but unlucky enough for it not to be an an interchange, and I decide to build a barn on it, that's fine. But if I paint "See Rock City" or "Chew Mail Pouch Tobacco -- Treat Yourself to the Best" then it becomes a nuisance?

Something close to this precise situation has happened just off I-91 in Vermont (https://www.stardem.com/news/exemption-to-40-year-old-billboard-ban-in-vermont-worries-some-residents/article_8f8a07b2-4ac2-538f-88ab-6dd9f56f84e0.html), except the painted display in question says "See Bellows Falls."  Given that billboard barns (https://www.farmprogress.com/farm-life/boom-billboard-barns) were a thing in the middle of the 20th century, care has to be taken regarding loopholes.

Quote from: hbelkins on July 31, 2022, 12:03:31 AM
So if I'm lucky enough to own a piece of land next to a busy freeway, but unlucky enough for it not to be an an interchange, and I decide to build a barn on it, that's fine. But if I paint "See Rock City" or "Chew Mail Pouch Tobacco -- Treat Yourself to the Best" then it becomes a nuisance?

If you are demanding that people spend money on something, you are a nuisance.

On the PA Turnpike today, I passed by a billboard for skiing and snowtubing.  Something clearly I'm not going to find off the next exit today.  The location for the company was probably at least 150 miles away...and definitely not an activity anyone will be partaking in for the next 3 months.  But it plants that thought in people's head that, hey, why not start thinking snow.

Then again, I forget the company that was doing the advertisement, so I guess it wasn't all that memorable.

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

Hell if I remember her name, but there is some lawyer lady all over billboards in the Atlanta area.

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

Joumana in Detroit. But who wants a lawyer who looks like Janice from Dr Teeth and the Electric Mayhem?

If it takes a billboard ban to rid our highway's of the ugly face of Drunken Party Animal John Morgan, I ll go for it even if it means to not see EXIT NOW on interchange billboards.   IMO those classic words are cool to see when on the road, but I'll make the sacrifice.

Quote from: formulanone on July 30, 2022, 06:15:24 PM

Quote from: oscar on July 30, 2022, 05:35:26 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2022, 04:46:00 PM
I won't spoil it for anyone else (our facetious running theory, based on the oddly non-specific slogans used, was that he was a sex worker), but it's certainly not something where you would make a decision on the basis of sheer impulse while on the road.

^ True, but it does make his name familiar. That gives him a leg up on his competitors (or cut into their edge from their own advertising), should you ever need services of the kind he offers.

People in his profession need to be careful about what they promise in their ads, thus his minimal promise that his office will at least return your phone calls. (But there's no phone number on the billboard, not even an easy-to-remember toll-free number. Maybe on one of his other billboards.)

Furthermore, sometimes they borrow the fame of one attorney to pitch for a more local law firm. Throughout Alabama, the likeness of Alexander Shunnarah can be found on every fourth billboard, where there's some small print explaining which firm might pick up the phone call or provide representation.

After the beer, law firm, and strip clubs are accounted for, it's probably insurance, banks, HVAC repair, dealerships, gas stations, restaurants, and hotels rounding out the top ten.

Along with law firms and insurance, the big billboard advertisers locally are cannabis dispensaries and Indian casinos. I think every third billboard between Riverside and Palm Springs is selling cannabis. They don't bother me any more than the peripheral ads on the free games I play on my phone.

The only billboards I dislike are the giant LED screens and that's only when there's motion or flashing on the screen. I don't care for billboards aesthetically but not to the point it bothers me, and occasionally they can be entertaining enough to break up rural interstate monotony.

Here in Boston, we hear the proclamation that there's only one Morgan and Morgan, even though there are obviously 2.

Quote from: kernals12 on July 31, 2022, 12:58:56 PM
Here in Boston, we hear the proclamation that there's only one Morgan and Morgan, even though there are obviously 2.

They're everywhere. We have them here, too (and I think the Morgan family actually has a Kentucky connection) but I always associated that firm with Florida.

I know I'd never use them. They hired one of the slimiest politicians in Kentucky history to be one of their more prominent faces here.

Several versions of this...

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/signs-billboards--406379566348754193/

Quote from: kernals12 on July 29, 2022, 09:32:36 AM
I just learned that 4 states ban billboards: Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, and Vermont. Billboards are ugly and they can distract drivers. And with the abundance of advertising space that can now be had on the internet, they are not really necessary anymore. Is there any reason, besides lobbying from billboard owners, other states haven't done it?

Well, Maryland doesn't have any on most of their rural Interstates. I-68 in the Cumberland area and I-95 in Baltimore are two exceptions.

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

One of the ambulance chasers in the Albany, NY area is female.

I could go both sides on this -- especially in the case of I-15 in the Southwest.

Either side of Vegas on I-15 from San Bernadino to Salt Lake there are hundreds of miles of nothingness.  I don't mind seeing a little distraction in advertising billboards, but there are some areas where the large signs are planted every ¼ mile, if not closer, on both sides of I-15.

I prefer signs that inform travelers of upcoming services, especially those that will list how many miles they are located from that point.

I also am fine with fuel Billboards that list what the going rate for fuel is at a particular exit. 

And I also like, especially when Vegas‐bound, some of the billboard "deals" you can get on food, or what shows are playing in town, as it helps people plan ahead with additional ideas.

Yes, the blue ground-mounted service signs at exits were designed in part to reduce some of the billboard clutter, but they are limited in info and only give a ½ -2 mile advance notice.

On the other hand, ambulance chaser billboards, political-leaning signage, or even billboards which promote questionable, semi-legal establishments (gentleman's clubs, fireworks, pot shops,...)  should be held on a tight leash, if even allowed to advertise on large-scale billboards.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Vermont, for one, does not use logo signs.  They'll post generic service signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3960541,-72.4146393,3a,21.8y,19.73h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7PQGxA8Ux57yo3PUyv8Z4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in advance of the exit but won't tell you which brand or how far.

Quote from: froggie on July 31, 2022, 10:14:38 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Vermont, for one, does not use logo signs.  They'll post generic service signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3960541,-72.4146393,3a,21.8y,19.73h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7PQGxA8Ux57yo3PUyv8Z4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in advance of the exit but won't tell you which brand or how far.

That said, the visitor information signage on their non-highways is pretty iconic.

Quote from: froggie on July 31, 2022, 10:14:38 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Vermont, for one, does not use logo signs.  They'll post generic service signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3960541,-72.4146393,3a,21.8y,19.73h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7PQGxA8Ux57yo3PUyv8Z4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in advance of the exit but won't tell you which brand or how far.

So VT basically bans all outdoor advertising.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 31, 2022, 10:24:38 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 31, 2022, 10:14:38 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Vermont, for one, does not use logo signs.  They'll post generic service signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3960541,-72.4146393,3a,21.8y,19.73h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7PQGxA8Ux57yo3PUyv8Z4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in advance of the exit but won't tell you which brand or how far.

So VT basically bans all outdoor advertising.

I think VT bans anything that makes money for any company.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 31, 2022, 10:24:38 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 31, 2022, 10:14:38 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 30, 2022, 10:04:44 AM

Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on July 30, 2022, 06:31:28 AM
An alternative to billboards are those signs on highways saying which services are available at the next exit, and then the distances to those establish,ents. More states could (and should) utilize them.

Doesn't nearly every state use these already? They're also not free - companies pay to get their logo on the sign. It's often one of the few transportation items that actually results in revenue and profit to a transportation department.

Vermont, for one, does not use logo signs.  They'll post generic service signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.3960541,-72.4146393,3a,21.8y,19.73h,91.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7PQGxA8Ux57yo3PUyv8Z4w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) in advance of the exit but won't tell you which brand or how far.

So VT basically bans all outdoor advertising.

On controlled-access facilities, yes (which was the point of the OP's initial post).  But see Rothman's response to me...they don't ban ALL outdoor advertising.

Quote from: thenetwork on July 31, 2022, 10:10:32 PM
I could go both sides on this -- especially in the case of I-15 in the Southwest.

Either side of Vegas on I-15 from San Bernadino to Salt Lake there are hundreds of miles of nothingness.  I don't mind seeing a little distraction in advertising billboards, but there are some areas where the large signs are planted every ¼ mile, if not closer, on both sides of I-15.

I prefer signs that inform travelers of upcoming services, especially those that will list how many miles they are located from that point.

I also am fine with fuel Billboards that list what the going rate for fuel is at a particular exit. 

And I also like, especially when Vegas‐bound, some of the billboard "deals" you can get on food, or what shows are playing in town, as it helps people plan ahead with additional ideas.

Yes, the blue ground-mounted service signs at exits were designed in part to reduce some of the billboard clutter, but they are limited in info and only give a ½ -2 mile advance notice.

On the other hand, ambulance chaser billboards, political-leaning signage, or even billboards which promote questionable, semi-legal establishments (gentleman's clubs, fireworks, pot shops,...)  should be held on a tight leash, if even allowed to advertise on large-scale billboards.

So billboards in general are OK unless the subject matter bothers you...even if it's advertising a legal business?

Irvine, California bans virtually all outdoor advertising. It looks very nice.

If it weren't for Alexander Shunnarah's billboards, how would you know that you're in Alabama?

(See, e.g.,  https://i.redd.it/rcfkebvvyyd91.jpg)

Quote from: thenetwork on July 31, 2022, 10:10:32 PM
I could go both sides on this -- especially in the case of I-15 in the Southwest.

Either side of Vegas on I-15 from San Bernadino to Salt Lake there are hundreds of miles of nothingness.  I don't mind seeing a little distraction in advertising billboards, but there are some areas where the large signs are planted every ¼ mile, if not closer, on both sides of I-15.

I prefer signs that inform travelers of upcoming services, especially those that will list how many miles they are located from that point.

I also am fine with fuel Billboards that list what the going rate for fuel is at a particular exit. 

And I also like, especially when Vegas‐bound, some of the billboard "deals" you can get on food, or what shows are playing in town, as it helps people plan ahead with additional ideas.

Yes, the blue ground-mounted service signs at exits were designed in part to reduce some of the billboard clutter, but they are limited in info and only give a ½ -2 mile advance notice.

On the other hand, ambulance chaser billboards, political-leaning signage, or even billboards which promote questionable, semi-legal establishments (gentleman's clubs, fireworks, pot shops,...)  should be held on a tight leash, if even allowed to advertise on large-scale billboards.

Once you get into that sort of content-based regulation, you open up a big can of worms as to First Amendment issues. A state can engage in content-neutral regulation, but once you start basing what you allow or don't allow either exclusively or primarily based on what is being advertised, you run into problems.

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

Indiana has a state law that bars counties, municipalities or HOAs from prohibiting political signs on private property between 60 days before and 30 days after an election.

Instead of Billboards, why not sell advertising on retaining walls and guardrails to help raise private funds for a road project?  Out of the box and wacky idea and probably way too distracting for drivers.  But it may work in some instances where cities have budget shortfalls for essential projects. 

Quote from: Georgia Guardrail on August 01, 2022, 10:46:29 PM
Instead of Billboards, why not sell advertising on retaining walls and guardrails to help raise private funds for a road project?  Out of the box and wacky idea and probably way too distracting for drivers. 

Probably not distracting enough. Who's gonna read a guardrail, or retaining wall? Probably not enough to pay for the cost of such "advertising".

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs generally aren't about zoning. They're more about keeping a property clean and tidy, not having a broken down truck on your front lawn (good) but then delves into stupid stuff (color of house, car must be parked in garage at night, etc).

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

It's worth noting that many HOAs also maintain the infrastructure of the neighborhood (road, water/sewer, etc.) rather than the municipality, which probably keeps property taxes down in areas where HOAs are common, especially since suburban infrastructure is very expensive relative to the number of people it services.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Quote from: oscar on August 01, 2022, 11:28:26 PM

Quote from: Georgia Guardrail on August 01, 2022, 10:46:29 PM
Instead of Billboards, why not sell advertising on retaining walls and guardrails to help raise private funds for a road project?  Out of the box and wacky idea and probably way too distracting for drivers. 

Probably not distracting enough. Who's gonna read a guardrail, or retaining wall? Probably not enough to pay for the cost of such "advertising".

Not to mention freeway retaining walls are often covered in graffiti in many cities. I think any advertising on a retaining wall is practically asking to be overprinted with graffiti.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM


Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

LOL, I said "Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them."  Which is EXACTLY what your bolded statement suggests.

So perhaps you shouldn't be getting on my case about "inappropriate and inaccurate" statements when you apparently don't understand what "majority" means.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

For more gold, Community Associations Institute reports that their surveys show 85% like HOAs. Surprised that the number wasn't higher. It's like doing a AARoads forum survey asking if people like roads. Most will. And then we publish it saying a national poll shows nearly everyone loves roads.

(https://i.redd.it/fpjq7qswyp871.jpg)

The stylized fact, AIUI, is that HOAs became the default around 1980 because they were the easiest mechanism by which developers could offload their Clean Water Act stormwater management and water-quality obligations onto homeowners.  This suggests that entering a HOA is the price of buying into a post-1980 subdivision, and so not a free choice in any real sense.

It doesn't surprise me that many homeowners love HOAs.  They can be effective in curbing some types of bad-neighbor problems and in keeping out property speculators who want to turn whole neighborhoods into rentals or Airbnb homes.  But the potential is there for them to devolve into petty tyrannies, especially in states that place few limits on what they can do as a matter of contract law.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate. 🙄🙄🙄

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM
Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate. 🙄🙄🙄

They weren't my experiences.  Besides...nearly everyone who's actually lived in an HOA will only have an anecdotal experience or two, unless they are moving around often.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate.

My using anecdotes has nothing to do with your inability to understand your own source of information.  You have to contend with what the data actually showed, rather than what you incorrectly thought it meant.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 10:29:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate.

My using anecdotes has nothing to do with your inability to understand your own source of information.  You have to contend with what the data actually showed, rather than what you incorrectly thought it meant.

Oh you're on that line again?  Finally figured out what "majority"  means?

The survey showed your initial premise was flawed. And now you can't wriggle your way out of it so you're making stuff up.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 06:01:32 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 10:29:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate.

My using anecdotes has nothing to do with your inability to understand your own source of information.  You have to contend with what the data actually showed, rather than what you incorrectly thought it meant.

Oh you're on that line again?  Finally figured out what "majority"  means?

The survey showed your initial premise was flawed. And now you can't wriggle your way out of it so you're making stuff up.

That's not true, especially now with the deeper look at the methodology JeffandNicole provided.

You're just being argumentative at this point and not considering what your survey actually said and who by.  You seem to have quickly Googled it, posted it without really critically thinking about it (hence your "love it or neutral" statement that incorrectly summarized it) and then are ignoring the problems with it that have been pointed out to you.

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:57:54 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 06:01:32 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 10:29:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate.

My using anecdotes has nothing to do with your inability to understand your own source of information.  You have to contend with what the data actually showed, rather than what you incorrectly thought it meant.

Oh you're on that line again?  Finally figured out what "majority"  means?

The survey showed your initial premise was flawed. And now you can't wriggle your way out of it so you're making stuff up.

That's not true, especially now with the deeper look at the methodology JeffandNicole provided.

You're just being argumentative at this point and not considering what your survey actually said and who by.  You seem to have quickly Googled it, posted it without really critically thinking about it (hence your "love it or neutral" statement that incorrectly summarized it) and then are ignoring the problems with it that have been pointed out to you.

You mean by the guy who doesn't understand what "majority" means?

Yeah, excuse me for not taking you seriously.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 08:46:05 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:57:54 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 06:01:32 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 10:29:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate.

My using anecdotes has nothing to do with your inability to understand your own source of information.  You have to contend with what the data actually showed, rather than what you incorrectly thought it meant.

Oh you're on that line again?  Finally figured out what "majority"  means?

The survey showed your initial premise was flawed. And now you can't wriggle your way out of it so you're making stuff up.

That's not true, especially now with the deeper look at the methodology JeffandNicole provided.

You're just being argumentative at this point and not considering what your survey actually said and who by.  You seem to have quickly Googled it, posted it without really critically thinking about it (hence your "love it or neutral" statement that incorrectly summarized it) and then are ignoring the problems with it that have been pointed out to you.

You mean by the guy who doesn't understand what "majority" means?

Yeah, excuse me for not taking you seriously.

Just throwing this in, I hate, despise and loath my HOA.  That's my opinion, though. 

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 08:46:05 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:57:54 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 06:01:32 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 10:29:10 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 09:13:13 PM

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 02, 2022, 05:28:02 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 04:52:18 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 12:50:27 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 08:57:07 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 06:43:33 AM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 02, 2022, 05:56:34 AM

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on August 01, 2022, 08:49:04 AM

Quote from: kernals12 on July 30, 2022, 08:24:53 AM

Quote from: hbelkins on July 29, 2022, 09:59:57 PM
The First Amendment and private property rights are the two best reasons I can think of.

If you put a giant inflatable phallus in your front yard, it would not be long before a nice police officer showed up with a cease-and-desist order

It's not inflatable, but https://bit.ly/3SdyZbI

Link goes to a story on the F*ck HOA subreddit -- using bitly due to the name of the subreddit -- of one family's dispute with their HOA over landscaping boulders.  Religious freedom is invoked....

HOAs are at least a contract that someone willingly enters into. And they wouldn't be as necessary if municipalities just had better zoning laws.

HOAs aren't necessary at all.

Well some people seem to think so since they willingly agree to their terms. The problem isn't that HOAs exist, it is how they are run that cause the nightmare stories. But like everything, its the outliers that cause the headlines.

Not sure how willingly the acceptance of an HOA is.  It's pretty much, "I'll try to put up with it because I want to live in this school district," rather than, "I love HOAs since they look out for my own interest!"

I never said people "love HOAs," although some apparently do. (See below.)  I said that people view them as necessary since they willingly enter the agreement to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
You can't separate HOAs' existence from how they are run.  Their intended purpose invites the nightmarish management.

What?  Of course you can. Plenty of HOAs are operated just fine.

Quote from: Rothman on August 02, 2022, 12:37:36 PM
Yes, the extreme cases are indeed outliers, but I have only met one or two people that appreciate their HOA (with the admission that they're not perfect) and lots of people that outright don't.  They may not be living in a complete nightmare, but they are living in an environment of constant discomfort.

Instead of anecdotal experiences, there are actually surveys about them.

https://www.insurancequotes.com/home/honest-about-hoas

Pretty much a majority either "loves them" or has a pretty neutral view about them.

Please read the sources you provide links to, for that source does not support the statement you made...or you do not understand how the survey results were presented.  They show generational divides, but not how large each generation was represented in the sample.  Therefore, your overall statement lumping apples and oranges together is inappropriate and inaccurate.

From the poll results, a slim majority does love them (57%) while 33% hate them and the rest 10% are neutral, so it's pretty far away from just "love" and "neutral" as you described.

I am surprised there aren't more unbiased polls out there on this issue.  It's too bad this one seems to be the only one that's easily Google-able...and only from "Insurance Quotes.com."

Typing the "Source" (survey of 649 homeowners) and hoa reveals this info...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/independentamericancommunities.com/2018/11/09/honest-survey-young-homeowners-hate-hoas/amp/

Yeah you're right. Your anecdotal experiences are much more accurate.

My using anecdotes has nothing to do with your inability to understand your own source of information.  You have to contend with what the data actually showed, rather than what you incorrectly thought it meant.

Oh you're on that line again?  Finally figured out what "majority"  means?

The survey showed your initial premise was flawed. And now you can't wriggle your way out of it so you're making stuff up.

That's not true, especially now with the deeper look at the methodology JeffandNicole provided.

You're just being argumentative at this point and not considering what your survey actually said and who by.  You seem to have quickly Googled it, posted it without really critically thinking about it (hence your "love it or neutral" statement that incorrectly summarized it) and then are ignoring the problems with it that have been pointed out to you.

You mean by the guy who doesn't understand what "majority" means?

Yeah, excuse me for not taking you seriously.

Nah, I don't think I will.

I don't know if they're still there, but a number of the billboards along I-94 near Detroit Metro Airport were for automotive suppliers.  They were obviously directed toward designers and purchasers at the Big Three auto companies, not toward the thousands of ordinary motorists passing by daily.  I wonder if they actually generated any results; I thought it was strange that a company would take billboard space toward a very specific niche audience.

On the whole HOA issue, my observation over the years has been that people who have a beef with the concept of HOAs based on their own specific experience will usually be quite willing to discuss their own bad experiences, whereas people who claim to dislike HOAs generally don't tend to offer anything specific other than generally pointing to horror stories from some out-of-control HOAs (typically in Florida and Texas, which makes me wonder whether those states' legislatures and courts just abdicate their responsibilities). In other words, a lot of people dislike someone else's portrayal of an HOA, rather than anything specific.

Obviously, there's always the risk of someone getting out of control if the homeowners sleep on their rights and don't vote out problematic officers–but the same is true of any form of government.

My observation in our own neighborhood is that the people who have problems with the HOA are the people who deliberately set out to pick fights and cause problems. They tend to be antagonistic about various things and they come into discussions with their minds already made up and refuse to listen to any contrary viewpoints. A problem with that is that when this sort of person does have a good point to make, more often than not the person has already alienated everyone else through belligerence such that the valid point gets ignored. We got an architectural "violation" letter two years ago because we had our house partially painted and the job wasn't finished when the HOA inspector came through–we were also replacing windows and we understandably had the wood rot repair done first, then had the windows replaced, then had the painting done (idea being to avoid the need for touch-up painting if the window work caused paint chipping or the like). A simple e-mail to the HOA to tell them exactly that resolved the issue. No reason to go ballistic screaming at them about it. (They were unaware of the work because we didn't have to get prior approval for any of the work–we didn't change the paint color and because window replacement doesn't require approval in our neighborhood unless you change the window style, which we did not.)

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 30, 2022, 02:25:37 PM

Quote from: Ned Weasel on July 30, 2022, 06:24:43 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 08:17:49 PM
I've done art, and I've done advertising.

Advertising isn't art.

https://www.artsy.net/artist-series/andy-warhol-advertisements

That's art, not advertising. Warhol made some neat looking stuff, but I don't think any of it actually sold anything.

Look, if art and advertising are the same thing, why is it that I'm competent enough at art to get paid a reasonable sum to do it, but I'm so abysmal at advertising that I've lost vast sums of money doing it?

Here are the differences between the two, that I've learned from experience:

Art
- A form of expression. One normally creates art for the sake of creating art.
- You cannot succeed or fail at art, as it is subjective. Even if a piece has severe technical flaws someone may love it all the same.
- Art is generally open to interpretation. The artist may intend meaning X but the audience perceives meaning Y. This is generally considered to be okay or even desirable. In fact, the most badly-received art is when it overtly tries to get you to feel a certain way but can't actually pull it off (e.g. a stand-up comedian who isn't funny, a tearjerker movie that isn't actually sad).

Advertising
- A means to an end. That is, advertising is created for one purpose only–to increase income of the organization creating it.
- You sure as hell can fail at advertising. If your ad spend exceeds the increase in sales, the advertising campaign has objectively failed.
- Advertising is generally shooting for the narrowest interpretation possible. At a base level, if you intend to communicate "2 for $5" and the customer interprets "5 for $2" you have a problem. Even outside of the specific case like that, most of advertising is actually applied psychology. You want to get the customer feeling nostalgic so they buy your old-style toaster, you want them to feel anxious about their family's safety so they buy an alarm system, you want them to feel like they'll make a difference in the world if they buy your shoes made from recycled ocean plastic.

Now, some elements of an advertisement can be art. I don't think it would be correct to say that the logo design work of Paul Rand isn't art. But the sum of what ends up on a billboard? Very distinct from art.

This is a rather late response from me, but I disagree for the simple reason that many things can fall into two or more categories, even when those categories were once considered distinct from each other.

Road and street.  City and countryside.  Indoors and outdoors.  Car and truck.  Advertising and art.

Here are some good examples relevant to the topic: https://theempire.com/best-billboard-ads/ .  They don't have to change your mind, but they do support my philosophy that anything in life can be art.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 01:19:28 PM
My observation in our own neighborhood is that the people who have problems with the HOA are the people who deliberately set out to pick fights and cause problems. They tend to be antagonistic about various things and they come into discussions with their minds already made up and refuse to listen to any contrary viewpoints. A problem with that is that when this sort of person does have a good point to make, more often than not the person has already alienated everyone else through belligerence such that the valid point gets ignored. We got an architectural "violation" letter two years ago because we had our house partially painted and the job wasn't finished when the HOA inspector came through–we were also replacing windows and we understandably had the wood rot repair done first, then had the windows replaced, then had the painting done (idea being to avoid the need for touch-up painting if the window work caused paint chipping or the like). A simple e-mail to the HOA to tell them exactly that resolved the issue. No reason to go ballistic screaming at them about it. (They were unaware of the work because we didn't have to get prior approval for any of the work–we didn't change the paint color and because window replacement doesn't require approval in our neighborhood unless you change the window style, which we did not.)

Ugh.  Just sounds like an extra level of red tape I'd rather not deal with.  Is having a house sit around half-painted for a few days really detrimental enough to a neighborhood to necessitate paying an inspector to notice when it happens?

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 01:56:59 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 01:19:28 PM
My observation in our own neighborhood is that the people who have problems with the HOA are the people who deliberately set out to pick fights and cause problems. They tend to be antagonistic about various things and they come into discussions with their minds already made up and refuse to listen to any contrary viewpoints. A problem with that is that when this sort of person does have a good point to make, more often than not the person has already alienated everyone else through belligerence such that the valid point gets ignored. We got an architectural "violation" letter two years ago because we had our house partially painted and the job wasn't finished when the HOA inspector came through–we were also replacing windows and we understandably had the wood rot repair done first, then had the windows replaced, then had the painting done (idea being to avoid the need for touch-up painting if the window work caused paint chipping or the like). A simple e-mail to the HOA to tell them exactly that resolved the issue. No reason to go ballistic screaming at them about it. (They were unaware of the work because we didn't have to get prior approval for any of the work–we didn't change the paint color and because window replacement doesn't require approval in our neighborhood unless you change the window style, which we did not.)

Ugh.  Just sounds like an extra level of red tape I'd rather not deal with.  Is having a house sit around half-painted for a few days really detrimental enough to a neighborhood to necessitate paying an inspector to notice when it happens?

Ehhh, it was more than a few days. More like two months because the windows were delayed in shipment (not surprisingly in 2020, right?). Our neighborhood only has a once-a-year inspection program. I think they may sometimes take note of very egregious things that pop up at other times, but I've never gotten anything of that sort.

Without HOA's how else can we witness two groups of Karens arguing over grass and paint?

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 02:00:11 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 01:56:59 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 01:19:28 PM
My observation in our own neighborhood is that the people who have problems with the HOA are the people who deliberately set out to pick fights and cause problems. They tend to be antagonistic about various things and they come into discussions with their minds already made up and refuse to listen to any contrary viewpoints. A problem with that is that when this sort of person does have a good point to make, more often than not the person has already alienated everyone else through belligerence such that the valid point gets ignored. We got an architectural "violation" letter two years ago because we had our house partially painted and the job wasn't finished when the HOA inspector came through–we were also replacing windows and we understandably had the wood rot repair done first, then had the windows replaced, then had the painting done (idea being to avoid the need for touch-up painting if the window work caused paint chipping or the like). A simple e-mail to the HOA to tell them exactly that resolved the issue. No reason to go ballistic screaming at them about it. (They were unaware of the work because we didn't have to get prior approval for any of the work–we didn't change the paint color and because window replacement doesn't require approval in our neighborhood unless you change the window style, which we did not.)

Ugh.  Just sounds like an extra level of red tape I'd rather not deal with.  Is having a house sit around half-painted for a few days really detrimental enough to a neighborhood to necessitate paying an inspector to notice when it happens?

Ehhh, it was more than a few days. More like two months because the windows were delayed in shipment (not surprisingly in 2020, right?). Our neighborhood only has a once-a-year inspection program. I think they may sometimes take note of very egregious things that pop up at other times, but I've never gotten anything of that sort.

Two months...the horror...

HOA members: "I'm never going to recover financially from this."

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 04:12:37 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 02:00:11 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 01:56:59 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 01:19:28 PM
My observation in our own neighborhood is that the people who have problems with the HOA are the people who deliberately set out to pick fights and cause problems. They tend to be antagonistic about various things and they come into discussions with their minds already made up and refuse to listen to any contrary viewpoints. A problem with that is that when this sort of person does have a good point to make, more often than not the person has already alienated everyone else through belligerence such that the valid point gets ignored. We got an architectural "violation" letter two years ago because we had our house partially painted and the job wasn't finished when the HOA inspector came through–we were also replacing windows and we understandably had the wood rot repair done first, then had the windows replaced, then had the painting done (idea being to avoid the need for touch-up painting if the window work caused paint chipping or the like). A simple e-mail to the HOA to tell them exactly that resolved the issue. No reason to go ballistic screaming at them about it. (They were unaware of the work because we didn't have to get prior approval for any of the work–we didn't change the paint color and because window replacement doesn't require approval in our neighborhood unless you change the window style, which we did not.)

Ugh.  Just sounds like an extra level of red tape I'd rather not deal with.  Is having a house sit around half-painted for a few days really detrimental enough to a neighborhood to necessitate paying an inspector to notice when it happens?

Ehhh, it was more than a few days. More like two months because the windows were delayed in shipment (not surprisingly in 2020, right?). Our neighborhood only has a once-a-year inspection program. I think they may sometimes take note of very egregious things that pop up at other times, but I've never gotten anything of that sort.

Two months...the horror...

HOA members: "I'm never going to recover financially from this."

Again, no one makes you, or anyone else, live in an HOA. It's a voluntary contract.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 04:27:36 PM
Again, no one makes you, or anyone else, live in an HOA. It's a voluntary contract.

Nearly everything anyone does is voluntary.  It's a fairly poor argument for allowing something to occur, and many laws have been passed to prevent or combat against certain "voluntary" behavior.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 03, 2022, 04:35:34 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 04:27:36 PM
Again, no one makes you, or anyone else, live in an HOA. It's a voluntary contract.

Nearly everything anyone does is voluntary.  It's a fairly poor argument for allowing something to occur, and many laws have been passed to prevent or combat against certain "voluntary" behavior.

It's also not a great argument when arguing the benefits of the HOA: "Well, you're pointing out how it can be miserable, but people should appreciate...the misery...which they don't have to choose to be in..."

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 04:27:36 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 04:12:37 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 02:00:11 PM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 01:56:59 PM

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 03, 2022, 01:19:28 PM
My observation in our own neighborhood is that the people who have problems with the HOA are the people who deliberately set out to pick fights and cause problems. They tend to be antagonistic about various things and they come into discussions with their minds already made up and refuse to listen to any contrary viewpoints. A problem with that is that when this sort of person does have a good point to make, more often than not the person has already alienated everyone else through belligerence such that the valid point gets ignored. We got an architectural "violation" letter two years ago because we had our house partially painted and the job wasn't finished when the HOA inspector came through–we were also replacing windows and we understandably had the wood rot repair done first, then had the windows replaced, then had the painting done (idea being to avoid the need for touch-up painting if the window work caused paint chipping or the like). A simple e-mail to the HOA to tell them exactly that resolved the issue. No reason to go ballistic screaming at them about it. (They were unaware of the work because we didn't have to get prior approval for any of the work–we didn't change the paint color and because window replacement doesn't require approval in our neighborhood unless you change the window style, which we did not.)

Ugh.  Just sounds like an extra level of red tape I'd rather not deal with.  Is having a house sit around half-painted for a few days really detrimental enough to a neighborhood to necessitate paying an inspector to notice when it happens?

Ehhh, it was more than a few days. More like two months because the windows were delayed in shipment (not surprisingly in 2020, right?). Our neighborhood only has a once-a-year inspection program. I think they may sometimes take note of very egregious things that pop up at other times, but I've never gotten anything of that sort.

Two months...the horror...

HOA members: "I'm never going to recover financially from this."

Again, no one makes you, or anyone else, live in an HOA. It's a voluntary contract.

I think he's underscoring my point. He doesn't have any real problem with them, he has a problem with his perception of them.

Put differently, he first said a few days' delay in painting is not a problem (I agree with that, and certainly we all understand why bad weather, for example, can delay exterior painting). He then said two months' delay is fine. So where do you draw the line at what sort of delay is OK and what sort of delay is not, and what principle do you employ to draw that distinction and to say that anything shorter than that is inherently unreasonable? The answer is surely going to be along the lines of "ain't nobody going to tell me I have paint my house regardless of how much of a shithole it appears to be," although Rothman will surely put it in more educated terms than that (I'm envisioning a certain forum member from West Virginia when I type that hypothetical comment).

Setting all that aside, and trying to get the thread back on the topic of billboards, I wonder if the HOA stuff should be split to the off-topic board. It really doesn't have anything to do with billboards other than, perhaps, in the extremely tangential sense of a hypothetical HOA banning certain kinds of signs. (There was an infamous case of an out-of-control HOA here in Fairfax County that went after a homeowner over a claimed "violation" involving a political yard sign. It wound up being litigated up to the Virginia Supreme Court and the homeowner won–the HOA had acted in violation of its own bylaws. The HOA wound up insolvent. I don't think too many people felt much sympathy for them. But it's a classic example of why homeowners who don't vote in HOA elections and the like are foolish. If you're entitled to vote and you don't, you lose standing to have any valid complaint about the people who were elected.)

As with much else in life, HOAs versus non-HOA neighborhoods are a tradeoff.  I'm happy to live in a subdivision of the latter type, especially given the relatively weak protection against abuses in this state, but I know people who are happy there is a body governed by contract that keeps their neighbors from doing things (such as having weeds for a lawn) that they think pull down their own property values.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 03, 2022, 04:35:34 PM

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 03, 2022, 04:27:36 PM
Again, no one makes you, or anyone else, live in an HOA. It's a voluntary contract.

Nearly everything anyone does is voluntary.  It's a fairly poor argument for allowing something to occur, and many laws have been passed to prevent or combat against certain "voluntary" behavior.

I will put it another way - it is a contract that people willingly enter into.

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 04:37:55 PM
It's also not a great argument when arguing the benefits of the HOA: "Well, you're pointing out how it can be miserable, but people should appreciate...the misery...which they don't have to choose to be in..."

1995hoo doesn't seem miserable in the least. He is rightly pointing out WHY people WILLINGLY choose to live in HOAs.

You have deemed them useless - therefore you don't have to live in one.  See how simple that is?

HOAs are also necessary if you live in a condo or townhome where you're sharing a building/lawn/driveway/whatever with someone else.

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2022, 05:53:31 PM
HOAs are also necessary if you live in a condo or townhome where you're sharing a building/lawn/driveway/whatever with someone else.

Why?

I don't think that the typical "if you don't vote, you don't have any say to complain" is really a valid defense of HOAs run amok. That makes sense for federal and state officeholders, and even larger municipalities, because one can stay reasonably informed by consuming media coverage that summarizes the goings-on at those levels of government.  By buying into an HOA, you are adding yet another layer of politics where one has to understand the stakeholders, the candidates, their position on various issues that may be important to the voter, and having to do all of that without the benefit of media to provide at least a starting point to becoming an informed voter. The only real way to become informed is to attend meetings in person, which may be impossible in practice if they take place at a time when one has other commitments such as work, children's extracurriculars, etc. Even that may not be enough to get the full story if the HOA board has a habit of making decisions in back-channel meetings and the public meeting is merely a pro-forma rubber stamp; in such a case one basically has to befriend the members of the board to get the scoop on what's really going on. Getting involved in all of that is an undue burden that I personally would want to avoid, and I actually like politics.

Also, I think nobody has really addressed J.N. Winkler's point upthread that it is difficult to buy housing built after a certain date (and thus built to certain modern design standards which may be desirable) without being subject to HOA jurisdiction. This seems much like the arguments software companies use to defend abhorrent EULAs ("if you don't like that we harvest all of your data and sell it to anyone who enters our line of sight, just don't use our software–ask no questions about why a keyboard driver is collecting personal information to begin with"). It seems wrong to me that in some cities it may be impossible to buy housing that meets certain buyer requirements, such as compliance with modern energy efficiency standards, without also buying into an HOA as part of the deal.

Personally, I'd rather the entire concept of the HOA be abolished, and those functions that are actually necessary be taken on by organs of the actual municipal government, which are subject to somewhat greater scrutiny and are required to comply with things like open-records laws.

I can't say I've lived in an HOA or Covenant Community, but at a company I once worked with that sold replacement windows I was trying to sell some windows for a gentleman who lived in an HOA.

Apparently, some of his original windows in the front of the house were failing or broken.  HOA told him to get them fixed.  He wanted our nationally-known brand to replace the old windows, but the HOA did not approve, requiring him to replace brand for brand...except the old brand didn't exist anymore.

After going around and around with the HOA trying to explain the situation that the old company was DOA, we pretty much told them to piss off due to their stupidity and lack of logic.

That was the only time we had trouble with an HOA.

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 03, 2022, 04:48:32 PM
As with much else in life, HOAs versus non-HOA neighborhoods are a tradeoff.  I'm happy to live in a subdivision of the latter type, especially given the relatively weak protection against abuses in this state, but I know people who are happy there is a body governed by contract that keeps their neighbors from doing things (such as having weeds for a lawn) that they think pull down their own property values.

Speaking of weeds... lawn fertilization is kind of an "unspoken rule" in my (non-HOA) neighborhood. Almost everyone does it, or at least presumably does it, but there's one homeowner nearby who doesn't. Their yard inevitably fills up with dandelions every spring, and they inevitably blow into our yard when they go to seed. That, of course, makes it nearly impossible to keep our yard dandelion-free. It's mildly annoying, but I can't recall HOA's having ever come up in that context and we haven't done anything other than make a few suggestions mostly in jest ("let's put up a fence", "let's offer to fertilize for them", etc.)

I've wondered why dandelions are so hated.

I hate the one's that say CALL SAM on them. I was sitting in line at the Costco in Madison Heights which is right next to I-75 so of course there is a CALL SAM sign right next to there.

Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2022, 06:23:57 PM
I don't think that the typical "if you don't vote, you don't have any say to complain" is really a valid defense of HOAs run amok. That makes sense for federal and state officeholders, and even larger municipalities, because one can stay reasonably informed by consuming media coverage that summarizes the goings-on at those levels of government.  By buying into an HOA, you are adding yet another layer of politics where one has to understand the stakeholders, the candidates, their position on various issues that may be important to the voter, and having to do all of that without the benefit of media to provide at least a starting point to becoming an informed voter. The only real way to become informed is to attend meetings in person, which may be impossible in practice if they take place at a time when one has other commitments such as work, children's extracurriculars, etc. Even that may not be enough to get the full story if the HOA board has a habit of making decisions in back-channel meetings and the public meeting is merely a pro-forma rubber stamp; in such a case one basically has to befriend the members of the board to get the scoop on what's really going on. Getting involved in all of that is an undue burden that I personally would want to avoid, and I actually like politics.

Also, I think nobody has really addressed J.N. Winkler's point upthread that it is difficult to buy housing built after a certain date (and thus built to certain modern design standards which may be desirable) without being subject to HOA jurisdiction. This seems much like the arguments software companies use to defend abhorrent EULAs ("if you don't like that we harvest all of your data and sell it to anyone who enters our line of sight, just don't use our software–ask no questions about why a keyboard driver is collecting personal information to begin with"). It seems wrong to me that in some cities it may be impossible to buy housing that meets certain buyer requirements, such as compliance with modern energy efficiency standards, without also buying into an HOA as part of the deal.

Personally, I'd rather the entire concept of the HOA be abolished, and those functions that are actually necessary be taken on by organs of the actual municipal government, which are subject to somewhat greater scrutiny and are required to comply with things like open-records laws.

"I don't like something therefore it should be abolished."  🙄🙄🙄

Most HOAs are pretty benign organizations. Should they be regulated in a way to make sure they don't overreach? Sure. Outright abolished? Nope.

Again you have a choice whether or not to live in one.

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:20:29 PM

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2022, 05:53:31 PM
HOAs are also necessary if you live in a condo or townhome where you're sharing a building/lawn/driveway/whatever with someone else.

Why?

One reason is that you need someone to be responsible for repairs, maintenance, etc.

Quote from: webny99 on August 04, 2022, 08:00:51 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:20:29 PM

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2022, 05:53:31 PM
HOAs are also necessary if you live in a condo or townhome where you're sharing a building/lawn/driveway/whatever with someone else.

Why?

One reason is that you need someone to be responsible for repairs, maintenance, etc.

And maintenance of the common grounds. That was the main purpose of the only HOA I have been a part of, and it was fine. That's why abolishing them makes little sense.

Quote from: webny99 on August 04, 2022, 08:00:51 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:20:29 PM

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2022, 05:53:31 PM
HOAs are also necessary if you live in a condo or townhome where you're sharing a building/lawn/driveway/whatever with someone else.

Why?

One reason is that you need someone to be responsible for repairs, maintenance, etc.

True with a Condo. Not as necessary with a townhouse. After all, our cities are filled with rowhomes that don't require any sort of HOA. People just maintain their little lot of land.

In the subdivision I grew up in, there was an HOA rule that you couldn't build a pool in your backyard (except for people on one particular street) because it was feared that it would weaken support for the community rec center.

Quote from: webny99 on August 04, 2022, 08:00:51 AM

Quote from: Rothman on August 03, 2022, 06:20:29 PM

Quote from: US 89 on August 03, 2022, 05:53:31 PM
HOAs are also necessary if you live in a condo or townhome where you're sharing a building/lawn/driveway/whatever with someone else.

Why?

One reason is that you need someone to be responsible for repairs, maintenance, etc.

Yes, but often HOAs exercise power well beyond that, and it's not always clear from reading the HOA regulations before you buy, unless you happen to be an attorney.

My parents live in a townhome governed by an HOA, but it's authority is very narrow. It's essentially limited to collecting dues to maintain the common areas, and a few restrictions on modifying the exterior of units. It also requires a unanimous vote to extend the scope of the authority of the HOA, so as to prevent the kind of nightmares that we all hear about.

My first and only experience with an HOA was very different. It was in a large subdivision that hadn't been 100% sold/built yet. The HOA agreement stipulated that the developer would control the HOA until the lots were 80% sold. When we bought ours they were only 5 lots away. The (for profit) company that the developer had hired to manage the HOA convinced them (probably through kickbacks) to change the agreement to keep control until 6 months after the lots were 100% sold.

The HOA was based 200 miles away, and they added the cost of sending someone to hunt for fines into the fines they levied. Trash day was Wednesday, and if your trash cans were put out before Tuesday and/or brought back in after Thursday, that was a fine. They tried to say that political signs were not allowed and would be fined, but I sent them a letter noting that Indiana law bans HOAs from prohibiting political signs around election time. They called me asking for the specific section number in Indiana code. I told them I wasn't going to do their lawyer's work for them, but if they wanted to they could try me and find out later.

Needless to say, I've not lived anywhere governed by an HOA since.

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 04, 2022, 07:21:03 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2022, 06:23:57 PM
I don't think that the typical "if you don't vote, you don't have any say to complain" is really a valid defense of HOAs run amok. That makes sense for federal and state officeholders, and even larger municipalities, because one can stay reasonably informed by consuming media coverage that summarizes the goings-on at those levels of government.  By buying into an HOA, you are adding yet another layer of politics where one has to understand the stakeholders, the candidates, their position on various issues that may be important to the voter, and having to do all of that without the benefit of media to provide at least a starting point to becoming an informed voter. The only real way to become informed is to attend meetings in person, which may be impossible in practice if they take place at a time when one has other commitments such as work, children's extracurriculars, etc. Even that may not be enough to get the full story if the HOA board has a habit of making decisions in back-channel meetings and the public meeting is merely a pro-forma rubber stamp; in such a case one basically has to befriend the members of the board to get the scoop on what's really going on. Getting involved in all of that is an undue burden that I personally would want to avoid, and I actually like politics.

Also, I think nobody has really addressed J.N. Winkler's point upthread that it is difficult to buy housing built after a certain date (and thus built to certain modern design standards which may be desirable) without being subject to HOA jurisdiction. This seems much like the arguments software companies use to defend abhorrent EULAs ("if you don't like that we harvest all of your data and sell it to anyone who enters our line of sight, just don't use our software—ask no questions about why a keyboard driver is collecting personal information to begin with"). It seems wrong to me that in some cities it may be impossible to buy housing that meets certain buyer requirements, such as compliance with modern energy efficiency standards, without also buying into an HOA as part of the deal.

Personally, I'd rather the entire concept of the HOA be abolished, and those functions that are actually necessary be taken on by organs of the actual municipal government, which are subject to somewhat greater scrutiny and are required to comply with things like open-records laws.

“I don’t like something therefore it should be abolished.”

Most HOAs are pretty benign organizations. Should they be regulated in a way to make sure they don’t overreach? Sure. Outright abolished? Nope.

Again you have a choice whether or not to live in one.

Not necessarily.  Maybe you want to live in this one house with a voluntary HOA but you can't afford that one so you have to live in the cheaper house with the strict HOA.

I loving the banter.  I don't hate my HOA because I don't understand it or I have friends that hate it so I hate it just because.  I hate it because:

We have a very nice yard, but the HOA will drive by once or twice a week looking for things to report.  I have received letters for:

                   Having our trashcans visible from the front of the house. (this was three years after we moved in and had been in the same place that whole
                    time).  We were so upset with it we canceled our trash service.

                    Not pruning the dormant lantana at the beginning of spring when you are supposed to not prune them because they feed off the dead stalks. 
                    The whole flower bed was dormant at the time because, literally, it was like March 24th.  Again this was 4 years after we bought the house
                    and had done the same thing after every winter

                    Having mowing clippings in the road..  Not like piles or anything, no, just like a few clippings that got away.

                    Having our grass too tall weeks after the famous Snowmageden that hit Texas and I was doing everything I could to not do anything to the
                    lawn because I feared all our grass and plants (and trees) would never come back.

None of these notices resulted in fines, but all were justified reasons why things were like they were, and they were extremely temporary.  Yet it didn't stop them from being super nosey.  This is exacerbated by the fact they are finger wagging us about our yard while the common areas we pay for are filled with weeds and look like a front yard of a house someone died in.  It doesn't help our neighbor that is a hateful woman was on the board and her sole job was to walk around taking pictures of houses that were in violation while she runs a business out of her house with clients coming and going through the day that is explicitly written in our CCRs that you cannot do that. 

We have to have a 3' wrought iron fence around our house.  Not 4' and not 5'.  3'.  It has to be 3' and my dog can jump it, so we had to run an electric wire across the top to keep him from jumping it because lord knows we can't have a higher fence.  We can't have a fixed basketball hoop.  We can't have a car parked on either side of our house (driveway or in the garage is all we can do).  We can't paint our house any other color besides the other colors of the houses in the neighborhood (so it has to blend in).  We can't have decorations out for a holiday past 2 weeks of that holiday.  We can't change our landscaping without it being approved by the HOA.  We can't add on the the house.  We can't build a pool.  We can't have anything in the sidewalk, no matter how trivial it may be.  We can't work on our cars in our own damn driveway!  We can't have a little shed to put tools in because of the wrought iron fence law it can be seen from the road (I know, what a sin!).

I know most of these rules are written for 2 reasons.  To stop people from turning their house/lawn into a mechanic's shop or completely trash out the joint and to have a built in reason to harass someone they don't like, because they can't harass them because they don't like them, but they can harass them because they broke one of these stupid rules.  It reminds me of the 10 year rule a some RV parks.  They say you can't have an RV over 10 years old to stay at their park.  Ours is over 10 years old and is in great shape, and I know that's not what they are trying to keep away.  They aren't trying to keep out the family with a 2012 RV that's in great shape and the family is quiet and keeps to themselves; they are trying to keep out that guy that gets noisy and everyone complains about, but isn't really doing anything enough to get kicked out, but hey, his RV is over 10 years old, so we get to get rid of you for another reason. 

Quote from: SEWIGuy on August 04, 2022, 07:21:03 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on August 03, 2022, 06:23:57 PM
Also, I think nobody has really addressed J.N. Winkler's point upthread that it is difficult to buy housing built after a certain date (and thus built to certain modern design standards which may be desirable) without being subject to HOA jurisdiction. This seems much like the arguments software companies use to defend abhorrent EULAs ("if you don't like that we harvest all of your data and sell it to anyone who enters our line of sight, just don't use our software–ask no questions about why a keyboard driver is collecting personal information to begin with"). It seems wrong to me that in some cities it may be impossible to buy housing that meets certain buyer requirements, such as compliance with modern energy efficiency standards, without also buying into an HOA as part of the deal.

Personally, I'd rather the entire concept of the HOA be abolished, and those functions that are actually necessary be taken on by organs of the actual municipal government, which are subject to somewhat greater scrutiny and are required to comply with things like open-records laws.

Again you have a choice whether or not to live in one.

I think nobody has really addressed J.N. Winkler's point upthread that it is difficult to buy housing built after a certain date (and thus built to certain modern design standards which may be desirable) without being subject to HOA jurisdiction. This seems much like the arguments software companies use to defend abhorrent EULAs ("if you don't like that we harvest all of your data and sell it to anyone who enters our line of sight, just don't use our software–ask no questions about why a keyboard driver is collecting personal information to begin with"). It seems wrong to me that in some cities it may be impossible to buy housing that meets certain buyer requirements, such as compliance with modern energy efficiency standards, without also buying into an HOA as part of the deal.

In my neck of the woods, we have 3 types of subdivisions intertwined with each other.  There are some neighborhoods that fall under and HOA jurisdiction.  We also have neighborhoods that are entirely within the "official" city limits.  Finally, we also have neighborhoods that are technically under county ordinances only, and have not been annexed by the city.

Pretty much if you live within the county jurisdiction and not part of an HOA or covenant community, there is little to no action that anyone can take on the appearance of your house and property.  If you live within the city limits, there are more ordinances that can be enforced on the appearance of your house and grounds (weeds, trash, etc.)

You can drive down many streets outside of the original square mile of the town and see how it's a checkerboard of city and county subdivisions built next to each other (county streets have green street blades, city streets use blue).  And you can definitely tell the difference between city & county or HOA/non-HOA neighborhoods by the appearance of their properties.

I live in an unincorporated subdivision in the county.  Fortunately, we are a small 3-street subdivision where people take good care of their properties.  One block over in the next subdivision, you have well-manicured grounds next to unwatered, trash ridden front yards with 1 or 2 cars on blocks and houses that haven't been painted in over 40 years.  Yet we are surrounded by annexed city boundaries.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 29, 2022, 01:03:53 PM

Quote from: SP Cook on July 29, 2022, 11:50:02 AM
Billboards provide useful and needed information to the traveling public.

(https://i.imgur.com/nquIgE0.jpg)

Welcome to my world.

Quote from: oscar on July 31, 2022, 12:38:51 AM

Quote from: 1 on July 30, 2022, 06:36:54 PM
Going back to a sentence in a previous post... are any of these law firm billboard people female?

I've seen many billboards with at least one female lawyer. A few with most or all of the lawyers female, including at least one featuring attractive female lawyers for a firm specializing in defending male clients in divorce cases. (Yeah, as if any of those clients have any chance at all for getting anything more than legal services from those women.)

Around here the attractive females on billboards are usually advertising aesthetic services (i.e. cosmetic surgery).