I’ve heard of whacky Homeowners Association rules but this is ridiculous. 6-year old Kimberly Broffman lives with her grandparents, but maybe not for much longer. You see, she’s in danger of being evicted because the homeowners association in Largo, Florida has requested it. Talk about heartless.
Judie and Jimmy Stottler live in a 55 and over community in Largo, Florida. Back in 2004 their daughter and then baby Kimberly came to live with them after a home invasion and assault. Later, the mother of Kimberly Broffman went back to her old lifestyle which included drugs. The Stottlers made the tough choice to send their daughter packing and care for young Kimberly.
Two years ago, the homeowners association, which manages their 55 and over community summoned the Stottlers to court; they wanted Kimberly Broffman evicted. The bylaws of the community state that a child may not live in the community for more than 60 days a year.
The Stottlers have no other recourse; they’ve been trying to sell their home to no avail. The asking price of their home has fallen some $20,000 dollars while the recession drags on. Kimberly Broffman would be remanded to a foster home, splitting the family up.
Yes, rules are rules. But a 6-year old evicted? Thrown out into the street because you only want those 55 and older living there? Whatever happened to compassion? Whatever happened to common sense for crying out loud?
The Stottlers have been through a lot from the sound of it. Why not cut them some slack. The homeowners association would no doubt say they have. After all, they graciously allowed the Stottlers 18 months to sell their home and get the little 6-year old hellion out. How generous.
What does 6-year old Kimberly Broffman think about all of this? From the St. Pete Times:
In her own 6-year-old way, Kimberly agrees. From the top of her pink bunk bed, in a room strewn with stuffed bears and plastic toys, she speaks her mind after a shy stretch of silence.
“This,” she said, “is my home.”
That about sums it up, don’t you think? What the court system and homeowners association can’t figure out, 6-year old Kimberly Broffman can.
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:29 am
give them 1 year
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:30 am
or change the by laws
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:17 am
otoh, I have friends who live in a community that is restricted to residents 55 years old and above. They moved there intentionally because of that since they didnt want to be surrounded by loud music, reckless driving, etc. My guess is most of the residents moved there for similar reasons.
Well, wouldnt it lower the property value if the community could no longer market it like that.
Heck, they gave them 18 months to sell. I understand that the housing market sucks in fla, but so what. Sometimes, you gotta take a hit for your family, instead of trying to cheat. These people knew the rules; they probably felt the same way, until they thought the rules shouldnt apply to themselves.
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:24 am
Arriba, the rule sucks, and so do you, azzhole.
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:37 am
I really don’t think one six year old, with the house listed for sale, is going to kill the property value. Let her stay until they get the place sold. Nobody is alleging that the family isn’t trying to sell just to cheat the system.
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:04 am
yeah, I got that, ryan…and I’m sure she’s a very sweet kid. But what evidence is there that the gparents have even tried to sell the house? So now, let’s make it ad hoc, that no kid older than x can live there. Well, what happens when this kid is x+1 or someone else plans on having their older gkid move in?
If it’s your position that communities can’t set up or enforce their rules, so be it. I sort of would rather have communities do this than let judges settle it.
When we bought our home, I didnt know there was a rule saying that lawns had to be edged. Within a month, I got a notice saying if I didnt edge, they’d hire someone and I’d pay for it. I then bought an edger.
A friend in pgh lives in a community that mandates that he has to shovel his sidewalk within 24 hours of a snowfall. His wife and he were on vacation; when they returned home, he was presented with a bill for the snow removal.
October 23rd, 2009 at 10:18 am
just let her stay
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:07 pm
Being a family friend of this little girl, Kimberly. I know that the Stottler’s have been trying there hardest to sell the house.Judy juggling a job and a full time mother, to her granddaughter, Kimberly. As well as carring for her disabled husband Jimmy.
Kimberly’s mom has a a heavy cross to bare,during the home invasion, She was almost killed. By a man she thought was a friend. She is working on her drug problems curently, which was brought on from the home invasion. She has a disabillity herself, but hopes and prays to be in Kimberly’s life.
I see homlessness every day in the area I live,This can not happen to this family. Please, there needs to someone out there, that has a home for Kimberly and is willing to trade.
Is this world that cruel!
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:16 pm
I sort of like that idea…if they absolutely cannot sell their home (I’m sorry, but I believe that everything has a price) why not do a straight even trade with some couple/individual who lives in a child-friendly neighborhood but would prefer a little peace and quiet. It’s my understanding that there are a lot of homes for sale in florida.
October 24th, 2009 at 5:26 am
This is a reason I hate HOA’s. We just got a notice to trim trees that overhung the sidewalk (they don’t), a garden that is “too big,” (no definition given) - the garden and the size were approved 10 years ago by the association, and to top it off, we were supposed to fix and paint a (non-paintable) “shutter.” For the life of me, which shutter? Perhaps I should paint one and leave the others for next year?
I think reason has left the minds of these folks when they get on these boards - i have sat on enough of them to understand the mindset.
Leave the poor woman alone. As long as she has tried, and given all her issues described by her friend above, I think any effort the woman puts forward should be credited.
arriba - the problem with residents changing or policing their own rules, is that HOA rules are put in place by builders (which heavily lobbied state legislatures) and they were made to be virtually unchangable, so that residents couldn’t do anything adverse to the builder’s interests. Even if the residents wanted to cut her a break, the 3/4 or 4/5 majority of residents required to vote to overturn the Board is insurmountable. Judges are bound by the laws that were passed to favor the builders and rarely do residents win those cases; the HOAs always win. The woman has a definite problem, unfortunately.
October 24th, 2009 at 6:47 am
when I explained the issue to my wife, expecting her full support, she replied that she didnt know how she could have been married so long to someone whose heart had turned into stone. So I may have to rethink my position…
October 24th, 2009 at 8:31 am
arriba - I like your wife already - and I don’t even know her…
October 24th, 2009 at 8:47 am
I live in Florida and know these communities. The couple knew there was a limit to the time the child could stay. More importantly, they knew when the homeowners first complained 5 years ago. They should have sold then instead of making the weak housing market as an excuse. I say the child has to go. IF they make an exception here, they have to make an exception every time.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:18 am
So she moved in in 2004? That was 5 almost 6 years ago. The grandparents knew the rules then. Why did they not try to sell their house at the time they decided to take the kid in?
This is a retirement community. People who move to these places are entitled to get what they pay for and if that is an adult only neighborhood, that is what it should remain until everyone decides otherwise and not just two people who want the rules to be bent just for them.
October 24th, 2009 at 10:25 am
Wow, people. So many of you have absolutely no concern or regard for rules and contractual obligations. These grandparents bought into this community BECAUSE it is a 55 and over community. Just because their family dynamic has changed, regardless of the reasons, does not mean that the rest of the communities’ property rights and propery value should be adversely affected, which they would be if this girl were allowed to stay.
Many people have difficult circumstances develop in their lives. It is irresponsible to pass those problems on to others. They could rent an apartment until the place sells. Better, they could have priced the place to sell and still doubled their money instead of trying to triple or quadruple what they paid for the place.
Why do you feel the need to vilify these other residents for buying into a 55 and over community and then expect that it will actually be a 55 and over community? Remember, those grandparents bought in for the same reasons and protections.
October 26th, 2009 at 3:36 am
I am a little confused at this. How is it a community can decide who should be allowed to live there? If thats the case can they choose what races they might like as well? Where does it stop? Just a little something to think about.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:27 am
In April 2005, Judie Stottler signed a mediation agreement saying her family would comply with the Lakes’ rules by Oct. 1, 2006. - St Petersburg Post, April 1, 2007
And look where we are 3 years after the deadline passed that she agreed to. The deadline that gave her 18 months to move. You people want how many more years of leniency to be given? These people have no real intention of ever moving unless there is a forced eviction.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Dave, this 55 and over community is legal and was created to have a place for seniors to reside together, to avoid the distractions and disruptions that younger people bring, to share facilities and be sheltered from school tax. These seniors sign purchase agreements and HOA contracts with the full understanding that no person may reside in their residence for more than 60 days who is under the age of 55. There are many 55 and over communities. If this girl stays then the community property and community buildings will be subject to school tax. Her staying would also result in lowering the property value on ALL homes in that community because that tax exemption would no longer apply.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Yeah, little Kimberly is cute as a button, but rules are rules and she’s gotta go.
Don’t you bleeding hearts get tired of people bending or breaking the rules after agreeing to follow them?
October 31st, 2009 at 11:27 pm
THE RULES IN FLA SUCK. ALWAYS TRYING TO CONTROL OTHER PEOPLES LIVES. MOST OF THE ELDERLY WHO THINK THEY OWN THE STATE SUCK TOO. THEY ARE THE MOST STUCK UP RUDE BUNCH OF OLD HAGLETTS WHO THINK EVERYONE SHOULD KISS THEIR ASSES I HAVE EVER SEEN IN ANY STATE. I THINK ITS AGE DISCRIMINATION…I THINK THEY SHOULD TAKE DRIVERS LICENCES AWAY FROM THE SENIORS IN FLA…HOWS THAT FOR AGE DISCRIMINATION ! YOU CANT DRIVE, YOU CAUSE MOST OF THE ACCIDENTS IN FLA. YOUR REFLEXES ARE NOT GOOD ANY MORE, YOU CANT SEE OVER YOUR STEERING WHEELS, YOUR DEAF, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ON THE ROADS…BUT RULES ARE RULES YOU HEARTLESS BUNCH OF OLD SHRIVLED UP MONEY HORTERS. YOU PUT THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR FIRST BEFORE THE LIFE AND WELL BEING OF A CHILD.