READ THIS! OBAMA HATING APARTMENT MANAGEMENT FINING ME!

[deadlyaj]

Ive had Obama signs in my second floor window since Febuary with no problem what so ever.

Now Im getting stuff from apt management on my door saying remove the signs (they are on my windows on the INSIDE of my APT facing towards the street)

Can they do this? Is this right? Why would they want me to pull them down now and not months ago?

This isnt right and I need DU's help. Im tempted to call the news organizations. These signs are inside my apt on my windows, can they do this??!

I have till sunday to pull them down or face a fine. HELP ME!

Astoria The
5636 Spring Valley Rd
Dallas, TX 75254
[phone]

[Muttocracy]

1. is anything about decorations, signs, etc. mentioned in your lease?

[SunsetDreams]

6. good idea, check that first.

[rucky]

2. Check your lease.

I have a tenant with McCain signs in his windows. That's fine by me, even though I could go by the letter of the lease and have him take them down.

[SunsetDreams]

3. Call the news organizations! Make some noise!

[codjh9]

4. Good idea!!!

[yurbud]

65. Even if your lease prohibits it, the publicity will make the guy look like an ass

[glowing]

5. Find your contract you signed with the Apt people, read it, and then see if they can..

I'm assuming responding with, taking my free speech rights away will leave you with a hefty lawsuit payment would suffice.. but check the fine print.. and when contracts up, leave.

[1corona4u]

7. Call the news...give them some airtime....

fuckers...read your lease too. If it's not a restriction, then they can't enforce it.(unless it says they can change/ammend it at any time, without notice)

[Honeycombe8]

8. When I lived in apts, there was usu. a rule about putting anything on the windows.

You know how some people line their windows with tin foil? (yuk) Or newspapers? Or just slap on some insulation? Or put pictures?

Apts. always had rules that restricted what residents could put in their windows that was visible from the outside. It doesn't look nice. They want the windows all to look normal and nice and sort of alike and not have a bunch of junk on them.

It's not their political statement, probably. It's appearance.

[RichGirl]

9. Find renters rights in your area on the internet...google it...you'll find.

It'll be called something like renter's manual. The law is always on the renters side.

[NYC_SKP]

10. Once you find out what's legal, go apeshit with what IS allowed.

Paint your car Obama Blue and park it in a prominent place.
Fill every window with signs if they turn out to be allowed.
Find other tenants than might do the same.

Or maybe let it go, some folks might be on the fence (though I don't see how) and you might offend.

:shrug:

[WeDidIt]

11. If Renting, READ YOUR LEASE

If you're in a condo association, read the declaration and rules.

[Captiosus]

12. I'd recommend two things.

Firstly, do what you say and call your local news. Since you live in an apartment, you can't exactly put up yard signs so putting signs in the window is the only thing you can do to show your support.

Second, and this is the pragmatist in me speaking, check your lease. Back in my apartment renting days the management had a section which stated that only "approved window dressing (white curtains, white blinds, no colored curtains, no colored blinds, no signs or other items) would be permissible".

You will want to check your lease to see if you have a similar section because, unfortunately, if you do you won't have any legal standing to challenge the management as you signed in agreement with that policy.

[MarjorieG]

13. Do you like your apt and not want to leave, or be harrassed? Just saying...

[Botany]

14. Call the Obama HQ in Dallas and ask to speak to a lawyer

or the Dem party and ask for a lawyer

[deadlyaj]

15. Ive had these up for months

Since febuary, whyd they start bitching now?

[Ken Burch]

43. They finally get it that McCain is losing and they think forcing down Obama signs will help.

n/t.

[petronius]

16. Do they allow other signs? Pretty much every lease I've ever had

prohibited the display of signs in windows or outside. Sometimes managers have been lax about enforcing it, but if your lease has such a rule and they're not making exceptions for anyone else, I'd say you'd be better off removing the sign than fighting a no-win battle. Get a bumper sticker instead - they can't control what you put on your car. Or, wear an Obama pin or t-shirt every time you go outside...

[Ken Burch]

45. Another option might be to put a large teddy by the window with an Obama t-shirt on it.

They probably aren't allowed to interfere with your interior decorations.

[thevoiceofreason]

17. Highly unlikely they can do this legally.

Do read your lease. If it is the standard form for Texas apartments, it is probably silent on this issue, except for language like "don't do anything to disturb the neighbors."

A political sign would not violate that provision. Call the local Obama office and ask to speak to one of their legal folks. They can help you out.

Email me if you have any questions. I'll get one of my associates to look at it tomorrow if need be.

[deadlyaj]

29. Thank you - I would appreciate it

Could you do that for me? I think a phone call from someone with some knowledge on my behalf would help a ton in the long run.

[thevoiceofreason]

34. Not a problem. I remember you from the primary.

Just personal message me here if you need me to dig on this. I'm in Houston.

[deadlyaj]

38. thanks man - check this

never used pms, I see my inbox - send me one and i'll send you my info.

[Doremus]

18. I really don't think a rental lease can usurp our civil rights.

Freedom of speech can't be trumped by a measly rental lease, I'll bet.

[Captiosus]

19. Yes it can.

It's private property which means you play by the rules management gives you or you go somewhere else.

It's the same argument that applies to people on message boards (not saying here, just in general). Boards are privately owned so the owners of the boards can decide what speech they allow on their boards.

[Doremus]

27. Hmmm, you may be right. Doesn't seem right though.

Ownership of the property shouldn't matter if it's a person's domicile. I can't put a lawn sign on my neighbor's yard but I certainly can in my own. People's homes should be sacred, whether they rent or not.

[Captiosus]

31. I agree 100% with you.

Spending 8 years as a renter, though, reminds me of all the negative things.

Leases that allowed management to enter your apartment at any time of their choosing without forewarning;
Leases that disallowed anything in the windows or on the doors;
Leases that prevented renters from getting any appliances from anyone other than the management.

Sigh. I'm glad I'm not an apartment dweller anymore.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

30. It is privately owned but

but it is also being leased by a human with civil rights.

You are not leasing space here are you?:shrug:

The comparison is weak.

[Captiosus]

40. The comparison is not weak, your "rights" argument is.

I will be glad to have this argument with you because I've had it a million times before.

Do you agree that Freepers have the right to unmoderated discussion here on DU even when it's in favor of McCain? If one of them was to show up right now extolling the virtues of Michelle Bachmann, would you stand up and say 'Congratulations for exercising your first amendment rights'? Or would you be screaming at him and hitting the alert button waiting for a pizza to be delivered?

My guess is the latter.

DU is a privately owned, privately run site.
When we sign up, we sign a terms of use.
If we violate those terms of use, we can be banned.

When you sign to lease an apartment or a house, you are leasing privately owned housing. When you sign that lease, you agree to all of the rules and responsibilities set down by the management. If it says you can't have anything in your window but what they deem necessary and you take it to court, you will lose because you signed in agreement with that policy.

Here's the part I find people fail to grasp: You do not have a "basic human right" to freedom of speech. You have a legal, constitutional, right to freedom of speech. That legal constitutional right only extends as far as the government, not privately owned companies. By way of example, the case posted by someone below about a city passing an ordinance banning political signs could be contested in court because it is a government entity - the city or county - passing a law restricting free speech (in this case political signs).

Need more examples how your "freedom of speech" isn't sacrosanct when it comes to privately owned companies? Ok, here's a few more.

Food Lion and Wal-Mart will have you forcibly removed from the premises if you pass out anti-Food Lion or anti-Wal-Mart literature on their store properties. K-mart, at least here in Southeastern Virginia, has an anti-profanity policy and can have you forcibly removed, and placed on a list of banned individuals, if an employee, or customer, reports you for using profanity while in the store.

Now, I'm not defending this at all, but this is the way it is, legally.

The City of Newport News could pass an ordinance saying I can use any manner of speech I want in any place, but if K-Mart still wants to throw customers out for using profanity while on their property, they're legally entitled to.

[Captiosus]

57. Addendum

Just to clear somethings up here, here are the most often referred to SCOTUS cases which deal directly with Private Property and Free Speech. They both apply to shopping complexes, but have been referred to in other litigation, including private property lease agreements:

Lloyd v. Tanner (1972)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=407&invol=551
The SCOTUS concluded that owners of private shopping complexes had the right to limit speech (handbilling, specifically) from persons on their property.

Hudgens v. NLRB (1976)
http://www.usscplus.com/online/index.asp?case=4240507
The SCOTUS concluded that there is no First Amendment guarantee to free speech on privately owned shopping complexes.

Pruneyard v. Robins (1980)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=447&invol=74
The SCOTUS concluded that there is no First Amendment guarantee to free speech in privately owned shopping complexes, regardless of size. The court went on to conclude that States could grant broader power regarding free speech in privately owned, but accessible to the public, places by adding such increased powers in their own state constitutions.

Here's a State case in Delaware which specifically states that the landlord's right to impose rules on private property exceeds tenants' First Amendment rights:

896 Associates, LLC vs. Gillespie (2008)
Court of Chancery Delaware
http://www.delawarelitigation.com/intA9.PDF
In this case, Gillespie was handing out solicitations in violation of the non-solicitation clause of his lease agreement. The court found that the apartment complex owned by 896 Associates, LLC was not a state actor and did not meet any of the conditions set forth in Asociacion de Trabajadores Agricolas v. Green Giant Co. (United States Court of Appeals, Third District (1975)) to be considered sufficiently open to the public. For these reasons, the concluded that Gillespie had no rights under the First Amendment to distribute handbills in violation of the lease agreement.

Here's one of the most relevant points of the court's findings (emphasis added):

A contractual landlord/tenant relationship exists between Gillespie and 896 Associates analogous to the relationship between a homeowner and her homeowners' association. Gillespie has agreed to live in the apartment complex subject to the restrictions attendant to his relationship with Chelsea. These restrictions are reciprocal, in that each tenant benefits from the limitations placed on the other tenants.

What you may find interesting, however, is the following case regarding public, low income, housing and free speech.

Resident Action Council v. Seattle Housing Authority (2007-2008)
Supreme Court of the State of Washington
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=wa&vol=2008_sc/800065MAJ&invol=4

In this case, the management - Seattle Housing Authority - had posted a lease agreement stating that tenants of the public housing could not post signs on their doors. However, since the management was a government agency, this section of the lease agreement was concluded to be at odds with the First Amendment protections regarding free speech. Makes sense, right? Government body, government management, can't supersede federal law.

But what is particularly interesting in the case is how that the court went further in deciding for the Respondents. The court found that, under Washington State Law, the signing of a lease agreement was, in effect, turning over ownership temporarily to the renters and the door, itself, was now in the temporary possession of the renters, not the landlord because the lease itself did not explicitly provide otherwise.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

60. You went a little

overboard didn't you?

Maybe you need to get out more.

[Celebration]

68. Not at all

What if you owned an apartment building and the dwellers all put gang signs in the windows. You might not think that was free speech.

I'm huge into free speech, but it isn't the issue here if the lease prohibits this.

[undeterred]

20. There is a town next to Madison (Monona) that doesn't allow political yard signs.

I couldn't believe this when I heard it. Its a city ordinance. The police will tell you before they fine you. I don't think it applies to signs in windows, but there could be places where there are such laws.

I doubt it, though.

[SoxFan]

21. Suggestions from a lawyer

First, find a copy of your lease.

Second, call the state Obama HQ. They should be able to connect you with a lawyer who can spook the management company. In my experience, a "lawyergram" will shut p an obnoxious landlord 99% of the time.

[TeamJordan23]

22. Here is the contact information for the Texas ACLU

http://www.aclutx.org/contact.php

[theothersnippywshrub]

23. You're probably screwn.

Even if your lease allows the signs, it is obvious that your landlord is not going to look kindly on you being an American citizen exercising your rights under the United States Constitution.

I believe republicans call it VERBOTEN!

Even if you remove the signs, the landlord will be looking for another reason to make your life hell.

[democracy1st]

24. I would say take them down because it opens the door for fools to put all kinds of crap in their

windows I believe in having some uniformity in neighborhoods etc

[blogslut]

25. Are there any apartments with McSame signs?

If there are, then I would raise holy hell about it. If not, then I wouldn't.

[HEyHEY]

26. Wow, in Canada they aren't allowed to do that.

You can put up all the election signs you want.

[Lerrad]

33. Thats becasue Canada is a free country, the US use to be. n/t

[QueenOfCalifornia]

28. Tell them to fuck off

keep your signs in the window and call all the news channels and write letters to your local fish wrap.

They will have a hell of a time collecting a fine.

You pay for the use of the inside of that apartment. If you place a "Merry Christmas" sign with lights they would not fine you.

Assholes.

[applexcore]

32. Fire hazard, maybe?

What reasons are they giving you? Call the Obama HQ in your state and ask to speak with a lawyer.

[Tigress DEM]

69. A lot of places have this "homogeneous window treatment" clause.

So all curtains have to have white backing and you can't put up tin foil to block the sun on a west window or hang up spiderman sheets for the kids room, without a white liner on the back facing the street.

The idea I believe is that the entire rental property looks pretty much the same without any major differences that might draw the eye away from the whole.

My mother-in-law lives in a co-op and they had to get permission to put up a roman blind on their west side patio to block the afternoon sun and it had to be a certain color.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[deadlyaj]

36. who the f' are you?

get lost and start shit in another thread

[Ken Burch]

48. If you're going to say that, you're obliged to say why you don't believe the guy.

You can't just do a drive-by ad hominem post on the thread author's personal cred.

[iamthebandfanman]

63. agreed. n/t

[VenusRising]

37. Also, walk around your complex with a camera.

Take any pictures you see of any other signs or decoration in windows.

Do NOT be singled out. You have rights.

[bevoette]

39. this is the kind of thing making me afraid to leave Austin city limits.

i'm sorry this is happening to you :\

[stillcool]

41. I wouldn't put up a sign...

in my window. I rent the space, and share the building. They aren't my windows, and it isn't my property.

[kswheels]

42. Take them down

You have no rights here, since you don't own the building. Free speech or expression only applies if the government was telling you to take them down.

[EFerrari]

44. The answer is in the lease or rental agreement. n/t

[nannycee]

46. Apartment Association ....use them! And, the media! He can't....

...stop freedom of expression! Ridiculous! I'd get on this fast! How about the ACLU?

[kswheels]

49. Yes, he can.

Your civil rights mean nothing on private property. He owns the property, he can pretty much do what he wants.

[EFerrari]

51. A renter is entitled to quiet enjoyment of his apartment. n/t

[kswheels]

52. Stopped being quiet...

When the sign was put up in a window so others were forced to see it. The renter has no winning play here, other than to move out if it's that important.

[EFerrari]

53. The renter has a contract. If it doesn't specify no signs

then the landlord is out of line.

[thevoiceofreason]

56. Bullshit

Listen to Texas lawyers (like me). If the lease says no signs, then it's 50-50.

If the lease is silent (which it probably is), then AJ wins in a landslide. Freedom of speech even exists in Texas (despite governor Goodhair's desire to squelch it).

[nannycee]

47. Dupe sorry n/'t....

[deadlyaj]

50. I took them down

[stuntcat]

54. I lived in an apartment place that wouldn't let us have a political sign

The only reason that makes sense is maybe seeing the sign could somehow worry other renters who disagree with it ..? I guess.... ??? The place seemed kinda prison-campy with some of their rules, it was Post Apartments, they're a big company I think.

[mythyc]

58. oh no why why why

[SoCalDemGrrl]

55. Contact the ACLU ---- ASAP!!! Sounds like a free speech issue to me!

[gauguin57]

59. My lease says, specifically, no signs of any kind in front of my place or in windows.

... that means no campaign signs or any other kinds of signs. Yeah, it sucks. But at least I knew the rules when I moved in (actually, when I FIRST moved in, I was a journalist, so I couldn't have signs anyway because of my job (not supposed to show whom you're supporting in an election, to maintain the illusion of objectivity LOL!).

So, I just have bumper stickers on the front and back of my car, and I always wear my Obama button.

[BklnDem75]

61. How specific is the lease?

Would there be a similar reaction if you had the sign on your curtains or blinds? Maybe something that helps achieve the desired results without actually touching the window.

[unblock]

62. check the building for mclame signs and non-political signs as well

make sure you are not being singled out.

[iamthebandfanman]

64. yup, definitely do that. infact, thats probably the first thing i would have done. n/t

[brystheguy]

66. Put the sign on a post and just have it standing "by" the window.

That way, they are not really "on" your window, but you can just happen to see them "through" your window. Is that any different than having a piece of art on your wall that can be seen through the window?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

67. I own my condo and there is a regulation in the by-laws that we cannot have signs in the window

or on our front lawns. Check your lease.