![]() ![]() Section 5: OPA Board Subject: ARC/ECC Nonsense Msg# 1230781
|
||||||
Proposed:
A sign with more than one candidate is considered a sign for each candidate. So, suppose there are eight candidates and three open seats. Max individual signs for only three of the candidates. Suppose one sign with three candidate names is used on the property? The above seems to limit the lot owner to only ONE sign with three names, even though there are three open seats. Why on earth are we getting so far into the weeds? There may not be more signs than open seats on the board on any property. So, if there are eight candidates and two open seats, a lot owner cannot support all eight? |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: Hi Bruce. The proposed Guidelines would allow OPA to simply confiscate signs placed improperly on OPA common property. Great. I assume OPA common property includes the full width of road right-of-ways in OPA. If my memory is correct, you said in the past that removing signs from association member lots was not possible, or required lengthy due process. However, with regard to board candidate signs, why not make any Guideline provision allowing one board candidate sign per lot, a provision dependent on granting a variance from the DRs not allowing any signs, be based on the lot owner's implicit agreement that more than one sign per candidate would allow OPA to remove any excess signs and throw them away? Without the ability of OPA to remove excess candidate signs, any Guideline is useless. Too long-winded. Or just forbid any board candidate signs. An extremely preferable solution, and in keeping with the actual Declarations of Restrictions. Big picture? Way too many exceptions to thr DRs are, or were, granted over the years to the detriment of this community's property values. |