Sussex Man Refuses to Remove American Flag from Porch

[longnecker]

Kenneth Walsh displays an American flag outside his apartment in Selbyville, Del. (Photo: WBOC)

SELBYVILLE, Del.- A Sussex County man is refusing to remove an American flag from his front porch, despite word from the state that he's breaking the rules.

Kenneth Walsh received a letter from the Delaware State Housing Authority over the weekend advising him to remove the flagpole from the porch post of his Selbyville apartment.

"I refused to do so," said Walsh, who rents the apartment from the state and displays the flag daily.

The letter, dated Aug. 10, 2012, followed an inspection of the property by state officials.
Walsh said the flag is a source of great pride and a matter of free speech. He has about five smaller American flags planted in landscaping around the yard where he leases.

"I feel that, not only is it un-American for someone to ask someone to take down their American flag, but it also violates First Amendment rights," said Walsh.
The apartment off Hickory Court is part of a federally subsidized housing complex owned by the state of Delaware. The state housing authority said it has no problems with Old Glory or patriotism; in fact, the agency has a flagpole of its own in front of the complex office.
"It doesn't really have to do with the American flag. It's the way that the flag has been attached to the front post of the porch," said Christopher Whaley, housing management program administrator for the agency.
Whaley said screws and nails used to secure the pole to the post can cause damage to state property, one reason tenants are not allowed to attach any items to a building they do not own.
"According to the house rules that the client signed when they moved in, is that they're not supposed to attach anything to the woodwork, to the walls, the floors and other things like that on the apartment building," said Whaley.
Walsh agreed to the rules as part of the lease when he first moved in, Whaley said. The state said it is willing to consider alternatives, such as a stand alone pole in the yard.
"We're open to discussions with the client about putting some other type of flagpole outside the apartment as long as it's not attached to the building," said Whaley.
But Walsh still thinks the flag should stay where it is, stars and stripes forever.
"I will fight this till the end," Walsh said.

[Joe Walther]

Kenneth Walsh displays an American flag outside his apartment in Selbyville, Del. (Photo: WBOC)

SELBYVILLE, Del.- A Sussex County man is refusing to remove an American flag from his front porch, despite word from the state that he's breaking the rules.

Kenneth Walsh received a letter from the Delaware State Housing Authority over the weekend advising him to remove the flagpole from the porch post of his Selbyville apartment.

"I refused to do so," said Walsh, who rents the apartment from the state and displays the flag daily.

I deleted the rest of this in the interest of saving space.

This is just one more example of typical self-aggrandizing twits who can’t read. Of course, the media does its part to enlarge readership by publicizing the matter under an incendiary lead implying that Delaware State Government is anti-patriotism.

The jackass signed a lease agreement that clearly expressed a prohibition against modifying the physical structure of the building. It’s a standardized clause found in myriad lease agreements in both the private and public sectors.

The man may have all the flags he wants as long as he does not erect them by drilling holes in the structure, etc. and the State has so informed him of the fact.

But, it’s not good enough for him; he’s seeking his 15-minutes of fame by standing up to those “Godless Liberals” in the name of an imaginary cause.

I say give him his 15-minutes. Evict him; send him a bill for the repairs to the structure; and then level misdemeanor charges against him for damaging state property.

[Bellicose]

Agree, he signed the lease, he knows the rules. He needs to take it down. Maybe ask if he can put a post in the ground and place it there.

[longnecker]

I doubt too many people going into state housing actually read what they are signing. It's just sign here and that's it.

[EpicWin]

State housing doesn't look to shabby down there in "Slower Lower".

[Joe Walther]

I doubt too many people going into state housing actually read what they are signing. It's just sign here and that's it.

LN, I have no problems with people who live in state housing; there is no shame in doing so. Often their alternatives are severely limited through no fault of their own.

As for failing to read the conditions contained in legal documents, failure to do so is far from limited to just those living in state housing. I don’t blame them, either; the legalese involved is unnecessarily abstruse to the extreme.

But I do have major problems with emotionally-driven jackasses in search of publicized hissy fits—a task that the country’s news outlets and talk-radio pontificators all too often seem overly eager to accommodate. Such people, including some within the media, love wrapping themselves in the American Flag and incessantly bloviating about their utter devotion to the Constitution.

The fact is that they know precious little regarding its content and meaning. And 99 times out of every hundred, their own words tattle on them and, in the process, accomplish nothing more than to prove that they’re just plain stupid.

[Chase]

right, no one reads it but when they point it out to you, you should follow it.

if he really wanted to make a stink he could erect a massive self supported flag pole like at a car dealership lol, that would get attention....or this

[max1]

HA! he gets to keep the flag, who was the idiot who claimed the three screws holding it up were going to breach the integrity of the post?

“the bracket does not impair the structural integrity of the porch post and can remain.”

That was in the report, a state worker wrote that those three screws would "impair the structural integrity of the porch post" to me that is the problem when an over zealous employee can interpret the rules to his/her own whims.

[Joe Walther]

HA! he gets to keep the flag, who was the idiot who claimed the three screws holding it up were going to breach the integrity of the post?

“the bracket does not impair the structural integrity of the porch post and can remain.”

That was in the report, a state worker wrote that those three screws would "impair the structural integrity of the porch post" to me that is the problem when an over zealous employee can interpret the rules to his/her own whims.

Your point of the Housing Authority inspector making a unilateral decision is well taken Max. However, I don’t think you took the analysis far enough. The Housing Authority’s reversal does not change my opinion of the lessee’s dweeb status; it only forces me to include the Housing Authority’s inspector as a citizen of equal status residing within the realm of dweebhood.

To start, The News Journal’s report was much more detailed than was the report first posted on Talk Delaware. In fact, it was detailed enough to arouse suspicion—mine at any rate—that lessee’s motive had nothing to do with challenging a lease term and everything to do with raising the matter to flag-waving patriotic fervor.

First he admits that the inspector informed him that she was not sure that the flag—in the manner in which it was attached to the physical structure itself—was a violation of the lease agreement; and that she would get back to him.

He admitted that she told him that he may have to re-deploy the flag in a manner that didn’t violate the lease terms. Not only did he seem satisfied with this, he didn’t say a word about her alleged statement that she “couldn’t ALLOW him to fly THAT flag, etc.”

Then comes the inspector’s letter informing him that his flag as currently attached to the house was a violation of his lease agreement, including a quotation of specification as to why.

He didn’t request verification from Housing Authority management—though given their subsequent opinion on the matter, I doubt that it would have done him much good. Instead he went straight to the press and John Atkins. It was at this point that he interjected her alleged statement about can’t “ALLOW” him to fly “THAT” flag, etc.

This, combined with his getting John Atkins involved raises the REEK factor right into the stratosphere. All John Atkins does is stir the alleged flag-waving patriotism to the status emotionally-charged bullshit.

Now we have to add a compounding problem to the mess: a State Housing inspector seemingly overwhelmed by a need to be “in charge” of something. She issues a unilateral ruling under HER “authority.” This made her as much a part of this childish crap as the lessee was.

As usual when bureaucratic logic is involved, Housing Authority management not only fails to override her decision by applying some common sense, they circle the wagons to defend her actions.

In my opinion, this guy is still flag-waving clueless. At the first sign of potential defeat, he calls the press and reduces the entire matter to an emotional hissy fit. Then he calls John Atkins, who to his credit, is able to convince the Housing Authority that they’re looking blatantly stupid.

I applaud Mr. Atkins for this. Unfortunately, as he usually does, he blows a golden opportunity to show that he possesses a 3-digit IQ. Instead, he takes credit for preserving Delawareans’ rights to fly the flag, a matter that was NOT at issue from the start.

[max1]

I hear you Joe, I am all about individuals rights but I am also a person that likes what I see written down. You sign the lease you follow it, period. If the inspector had said from the start "You are not allowed to attach anything to the structure" she would have been right, and who could complain but she didn't she had to keep running her mouth. I have seen first hand the damage that can be done when a person who works for the state who is in a position of power who has no power tries to exert said power. She should have simply followed her little book and we would not be having this conversation, as for Mr. Atkins I simply can't believe he wouldn't have at least read the part in the lease that cites this before speaking.

[Curly]

God damn Romney supporter. Seriously, I have no sympathy for people who don't read a legal document thoroughly then act surprized when they get banged for breaking the rules. Use your head you big dummy, they are willing to compromise.

The state said it is willing to consider alternatives, such as a stand alone pole in the yard.