Marksmu

Well - Being that I am an attorney, I own a house effected by the ordinance, and I dont have to pay my own fees, I can fight it relatively cheaply. If it passes, I will sue....I would need to get plenty of evidence, which could be provided by realtors and builders, but I am not going to sit back and let a bunch of bureaucrats destroy my investments so they can live in their personal utopia where they can control everything they want. I'm sick of more and more government intrusion, this just takes it much much farther. Its sickening to think that I am forced to pay taxes to support these idiots agenda! We are certainly getting what we voted for this time around...

Krol, Your facts are not really facts at all...after seeing late last night on here that there were possibly Criminal repercussions for making modifications to an existing home without approval I actually went online and read the ENTIRE ordinance, something I am almost 100% certain that the Mayor, most of our city council, and all her goons have not done. The ordinance is an outrage. Its one of the largest power grabs I have ever read. Absolutely no where in the ordinance does it say they cannot control the color of your house. In fact the ordinance controls "any alteration" to the exterior of the home. Alteration is defined on page 1 of the ordinance as "any change to the exterior of the building, structure, object or site. Alteration shall include, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO" It is not limited to what is written, they have intentionally left the door wide open to what they can control. In fact by stating that they can control the site, they can also automatically control the landscaping, fencing, and everything else they feel like it. THAT IS NOT misinformation, that is black and white written down in the ordinance. You may want to argue that painting is "ordinary maintenance and repair" Well - ordinary maintenance and repair, does not need approval under the ordinance, unless the maintenance and repair "does not change the design, character, texture, or material of any exterior feature or constitute and alteration" (already defined above to be unlimited) Well...maybe it doesn't apply to me because nothing historic happened on my property, and my house is an ugly non-historic Jim Weekly home built in the 50's after the original bungalow burned down! Wrong again. If you are within the historic district, then the whole thing applies to you. That is located on page 5 of the ordinance 33-202 "scope" What is potentially really scary in the ordinance??? I will tell you. The ordinance can potentially be applied retroactively. You see the ordinance applies to the "site" and as defined "site" includes buildings and structures whether ruined, demolished, or relocated where the location retains historical, architectural, or archaeological value and integrity. But what could they do to the site??? They could require you to restore it! Under enforcement - 33-203(a) reads that "the city attorney may institute any legal action necessary to enforce this article or enjoin or otherwise cause the abatement of any violations hereof, including legal action necessary to recover damages, or REQUIRE RESTORATION OR RECONSTRUCTION" (This is admittedly a stretch, and I dont think they would require a person to tear down their new house and put the old one back...but the point is that you dont actually KNOW what they will do....its not in YOUR CONTROL, its in the control of a bunch of people who want to control your property, who are APPOINTED, not elected by the Mayor, who has already clearly stated her agenda, and is intentionally trying to ramrod this through without public opinion) So, what its just money right? Wrong - the poster above who stated it was a misdemeanor, A CRIME, was correct. Dont ask me how, I really do not understand how they could reach so far, but they have - it will be a CRIME, a misdemeanor, punishable by a minimum of $50 and not more than $500 for each violation found. Not only that, each day that the violation remains uncorrected is a NEW crime....Example. You paint your house Tan on a Saturday - the powers that be decide they dont like tan. They tell you its not historic, make it white. Then they fine you $500 on Monday when they find out You say what a crock of doo doo....but you have a job, and can only paint on the weekends....so you decide to fix it on Saturday...well thats a costly mistake, but Tuesday-Friday are all separate new violations...that delay could potentially cost you $2500 because they dont like the color you chose. Well...Im not in a historic district now, Im West of Ashland, so I am safe right? - Wrong - the ordinance allows the city council to designate (without chance for objection) buildings, structures, objects, sites, landmarks, and historic districts. They can do it as they see fit, when they feel like it, and you do not get to object in any real way....that is on page 10 "Division 3, Sec 33-221 "Designation" When instigated by the HAHC, you caat comment on it. When instigated by the homeowners you need 67% but when done by HAHC, nothing. They decide, because they know better than you what is good for your property. You are just too stupid to know what you should like. So, what if you like the ordinance, and you just want to do some minor work that will require a permit - Everything that requires a permit requires inspection (except emergency repairs, which will still need to be certified as compliant afterward, and corrected if deemed inappropriate) Well you will need plans drawn up to submit, or you will have to offer a photo with detailed instructions and materials of the changes to be made. That costs money and then they have 35 days minimum and as long as 70 days to decide on your application. If they reject it, you can resubmit and their time line starts over. That is just some of the highlights in this joke of an ordinance...there are many more that I did not take the time to highlight. The bottom line is that the ordinance, as written can control EVERY aspect of the outside of the house. It specifically exempts the inside of the home for the time being. It allows for massive expansion of areas as they deem fit, simply by having HAHC, in HAHC's own opinion decide that the area is historic. None of this is MISINFORMATION, its all in the ordinance....look it up yourself. It is legally impossible, 100% impossible for my property to infringe upon your rights, if it does not cross your property boundary, or cause a legal nusiance. Your rights END at your property line. You do not get to say what I do on my side, anymore than I get to say what you do on your side. If that were not the case I would just force you to move, because I don't like your attitude and your snobby feelings of entitlement encroaching upon my enjoyment of my property. This designation of historic has been done AFTER everyone bought without our input. It materially affects the value of our property, and is a taking of our private property rights.

it did not say: The GHPA will not tell you what your house must look like The GHPA will not tell you what materials you may use on your house The GHPA will not tell you what size your home may be The GHPA will not tell you what landscaping is required The GHPA will not make you bring up to their "standards" before issuing any permits to do work The GHPA will keep their not intrude upon individual homeowners private property rights. The GHPA will not change their mind and add hundreds of new restrictions at a later point. There are alot of things they did not say....those are just a few....its safer to keep them out of your business from the get go. I still cant believe there is actually a discussion on whether or not a POLITICIAN, gets to decide for YOU, what YOUR house should look like. ITS INSANE!

These are deed restrictions, not zoning. The Heights has businesses located throughout it. The poultry plant, the solar screens, the gutter places.....they are everywhere...I suspect some folks are nostalgic about those too, but this is not zoning where they don't let you use your home as a business, or vice versa...this is the city actually controlling what your home looks like, not just what you do out of it. I dont care for zoning much either, but arbitrarily placing after the fact restrictions on peoples homes who did not have them when they were purchased is just Wrong! Zoning can actually serve a purpose, as much as I hate it....deed restrictions only restrict you from having your home look the way you want...what type of siding, color, etc. Not just that you cant sell cars out of your front yard.

I do not want to stake the value of my house, my largest single investment, on the HOPE that somebody is going to side with me, or that we can finally get a competent mayor. I have complete control over my home now and I want to have complete control over my own home tomorrow. I will fight the ordinance, but at the same time I will ignore it if it does go into effect. It is a sad day that we even have to have a discussion whether or not some politician can tell me what type of siding I can have on my house or what color I am allowed to paint it. Its a sad day indeed.

Well they will be gone more quickly when the ordinance passes because I am certain that the house and its "improvements" will not meet the boards definition as historic. First time they need a permit to fix an air conditioner or a roof or a window, they will likely be required to bring the rest of the house into accordance with the restrictions, or they wont issue the permit. While I think the house is ugly, and the person an idiot for supporting the ordinance, I understand your like of that weird eclectic look, and I also support THEIR right to have a weird ugly art yard. With deed restrictions, and historic ordinances, this would not be allowed at all...Its probably a reason they moved there in the first place. There is not a suburb out there that would allow this monstrosity to stand...but its cool in the Heights. I may not like it, but I support others rights to like it, and their right to do it.

I have talked with many of these historic preservationist people. They oppose almost all new builds in the neighborhood. There are many beautiful new construction homes that fit perfectly in the neighborhood, even with their large size. The people who are supporting this ordinance, do not want ANY new construction. Look at Nicholson between 12th and 13th as a good example of new/old mixing well. You have the worst house on the street Corner of Nicholson/12th proudly supporting the historic ordinance....while the house is nothing more than a bunch of garbage that the owner thinks is art...rebar with winebottles, a stack of rocks still in the metal packaging it came in growing weeds out of it, an overgrown sidewalk, and 20' tall bamboo sticking straight out of the back. Then look down Nicholson towards 13th...you have a older home, then one huge home that takes which looks nice, but could have done more to fit in, then 2 smaller old homes, and 2 new homes that look great and fit in perfectly, followed by a small home, and then a tear down. This block is an attractive block with the exception of the ugly old support the historic district home on the corner. These people want to pass all of their dream ordinances/laws/restrictions before the public wakes up and realizes what has happened and then votes them out. It is ugly politics, but I believe that they truly do want to control every aspect of everything they have proposed. These people are losers with nothing better to do than waste their time imposing their beliefs on everyone else.

A little searching on the city web site, and I came across the historic district agenda. There is a place where you can send an email to comment on the current proposal if you cannot attend. Everyone who opposes this measure but cannot attend the meetings should send a strongly worded email to this address: historicpreservation@houstontx.gov I sent a strongly worded, yet polite email. I believe a case can be made that this historic district ordinance as it is currently worded, that requires certain styles, certain materials, etc, is a taking of private property development rights. I think a case could be made, that by imposing a set of restrictions that so severely limits property owners in their ability to utilize their property, that is not for the express purpose of promoting the health, safety, or welfare of the citizens, is essentially a form of condemnation without just compensation. The question will be whether or not the rules are so restrictive as to amount to a taking. I think if you can show that the additional costs imposed by the ordinance essentially makes the property worth less, then you have succeeded. Very few people can truly afford to build within the ridiculous confines set forth in this ordinance. Even fewer will be able to repair their existing homes within the guidelines. Send emails opposing the measure...it is important that the silent majority be heard. We need to stop letting the very loud minority of people take control of everything because they make more noise. Stand up and be heard. Oppose the measure...use your real name, and address, and go on record.

If you start and finish a job without getting caught, I don't think (key word think) that they can make you undo what you have completed even if they find out. I believe they can only make you stop what you are doing or try to issue a fine. It would be mighty hard for them to prove that you changed something without proof if it having been the other way. I would tell any inspector who came by that he was trespassing and that he needed a warrant to enter. I would love to see him come back with a warrant.

What do the yard signs at Boulivard say? I'm really looking for something that will really upset the snobby historic folks.

Where is this signature rescission form? I did not sign the petition but the person who owned the home before me did. I now own it, so I should have the power to retract any damage done by the previous owner. This is a huge power grab, its sickening. I am thinking of making yard signs that look identical to the historic district signs, that read: Stop snobby neighbors Say no to Government intrusion on Private Property Rights. Say no to Historic Districts

I am not disagreeing with your other points, but the Heights could really benefit from a left turn signal at Yale and 11th st, that was on a timer. In the afternoon, its very common to wait 2, maybe 3 light cycles...its a yield on left and the traffic coming down Yale is timed so that as soon as the cars approaching from the North reach the intersection it turns green...those folks on Yale turning West onto 11th end up waiting 2 or more cycles unless they just get out in the intersection and run the red after its turned. It annoys me tremendously...3-6 cars line up there and frequently only 1 gets through...if you have an old foagy who is scared of his shadow in the front, he may not make it through in a light cycle....I have recently been going straight and cutting through on 12th with all its dang stop signs b/c its still faster than waiting out the left turn there. With that said - I hate Walmart, I support their rights to build wherever they feel like it. I love the traffic arguments though. Any store that gets built is going to create more traffic. You live inner city, in one of the largest cities in the world. Traffic is a reality, get used to it. If your too high strung to sit through it, you need to move to the country where there is no traffic.

Those historic bungalow people are some of the most hypocritical, short sighted, snotty people out there. They think they get to control every aspect of everyone's lives. They have an idea of what they think something should be, and by god they have nothing better to do at all (they have no lives) than to sit around all the time, go door to door, write letters, petitions, start stupid face book pages, hire lawyers, etc, etc.... Every time I see a historic district sign or bumper sticker, I want to tear it up, but I refrain because unlike them, I know its not my business what they do with their property. More power to them if they want to save their tiny little cottage... but when you start telling me what to do with my land, you cross the line into none of your dang ole business.

No, just the opposite. I am simply stating that if you dont own it, you dont get to say what is done with it. I will still support your right to disagree with me. Complain all you want, it is your right to do so. It is NOT your right to get to CONTROL what people do with their property. Your welcome to hate it, talk about it, protest it, complain about it...your not welcome to control it....thats is the right of the owner. (within reason of course) Capitalism built the country period, we would not be in the same place we are now if we were a more socialist country. There are big differences between a retail store and a dangerous power plant. I am not against new power plants, coal or otherwise...we need more but the democrats and the same NIMBYS have made it almost impossible to build any new power plants. We have an abundance of natural gas in this country that we are not using because they cant get permits to build a power plant, b/c people like you who think they can control everything, dont want it within X miles of their home. I have absolutely no connection to WalMart. I hate the store. I never go there. Its been a very long time since I had to stop in at a WalMart. The store will not make me happy, I actually do not want it there....but I'm not so selfish as to think that just because I dont want something and have no use for it, that others dont. My preferences are certainly not so important as to get to control everyone elses private property rights.. The same people who oppose any new construction in the heights are the same people who oppose the Walmart. They think they can control what others can do because it is what they want. News Flash - that is not how it works. I own rental property in the historic district, and when the time comes, I will bulldoze the house regardless of what some ordinance says b/c you dont get to control me.

After reading this entire thread, and then looking at that awful excuse for a facebook page - I can summarize this whole thread. 1. The people who want to control everyone else's lives and tell everyone else how to live - dont want Wal Mart. They also dont want new homes, or any increase in property value. They love whole foods, and overpriced gimmick crap They want to save the earth, and bad mouth anybody who makes any money at all. Oil is evil, Wal Mart is worse, and they are here to save the world. These people are almost undoubtedly Obama supporters who are too blind to see that the media has whitewashed all his failures, and who also blame everything wrong in the world today on Bush. 2. In the other camp, are the people who are sick of the stereotyped people above. They are from varied political ideologies (get that from the politics section here) They are protective of private property rights, and generally think that the free market will work things out..They believe that Capitalism and the free market built this country, and that the unions, and people who try to control every aspect of everyone elses lives are at fault for the continual decline. Personally I find the majority of the people in the stop the walmart/ Houston Heights Association people to be offensive. It makes me sick to see people think they have the right to tell someone else what they can or cant do with their own property. I hope WalMart reads this thread and that joke for a facebook page, and instead of building a Wal Mart, builds a gun store, with a gun range, a military recruitment center, a RNC headquarters, and an architectural company who specializes in demolishing small bunaglows that have "Save Our Historic Neighbohood" signs in their front yards, and replacing them with HUGE modern monstrosities. The gall that you people YES, "You People" think you have the right to tell others how to live is sickening. " If you dont want the walmart, get your hippy do gooder friends to all chip in and you can buy the lot and build another farmers market where everyone can buy "local" "organic" food straight from Mexico. Until you can afford it, you have no right to tell others who can what they can or cant do with it. Its not yours, its not your business, I dont care where it is.

I dont disagree with most of what you have said here, except that Walmart will take market share from the small mom and pop stores, even from the people who despise the store. There are too many instances, where you need something cheap, fast, and now. Mom & Pop stores often are not open when you need those things....WalMart fills that void, even for people who despise it. I despise Walmart - I hate going in them...but if you need a fishing license at 3am, and a few snacks, and some gas, and you want to do that fast and in all in one stop....well your SOL anywhere but Walmart. Walmart is about cheap convenience....nothing more. They treat their employees the way they do, because if they did not, their products would cost more. I am a huge fan of shopping local, and avoiding large chain stores that dont care or support our community, but there are instances when you have to break your own rules because you actually need something they have. That said, while I have succesfully avoided Walmart for at least the past 3 years, I support their right to build whatever they want wherever they want to. If a community does not like a walmart, then by god dont shop there. Opinionated people should not have any say whatsoever about what gets built....money talks. If you dont like it, dont shop there, or buy the area yourself....they will go out of business if nobody shops there.

Nobody is incapable of learning, but what people do not want is some idealist with impracticable ideals telling them what they can and can not do with the single largest investment in their life....I think that is what these preservationist, dont seem to get. Half of them dont own a historic home, and are just trying to keep new builds out so their property values stay low....the other half - those who do own a historic home, seem to think that because they enjoy something, and really love it, and want it to stay just the way they like that everyone else should too. They are a loud minority trying to cram their beliefs down everyone elses throats...they dont care about the repercussions to others, because it is what they want. You dont get to decide what I get to do with what I own, because its not what you want - I dont care what you want. its not your property - you have no say if there are no deed restrictions. You dont get to change the rules later because you are not winning. If you want to live in deed restricted areas, do so, but don't come here and try to change the rules in the middle of the game. But, thats the great part about America - you get to do what you want with your own property, and if others dont like it, they can either buy it from you, or you can tell them to sod off. I own a rental property that is in one of these districts, and I can guarantee that when the time comes to bring it down, (its not a historic home of any value) if some stupid preservationist or city ordinance trys to stop me, I will bulldoze it on a Sunday and within an hour of dropping the equipment off. The house, the rubbel, and the equipment will be gone as fast as it showed up. Ill say I have no idea who did it, but I am sure glad they did! Will I get a ticket, or something for not doing it up to code? Probably so, Ill play dumb, they will slap me on the wrist with some $1000 fine or something and I will build the largest monstrosity you have ever seen just to piss em off. If they wont permit the monstrosity because some preservationist does not like the design I will turn the lot into the largest eye sore the heights as ever seen. Ill park old cars there, and let people put their boats there for storage....Ill put up a sign that says why I am doing what I am doing, and Ill circulate petitions and buy more lots to do the same thing until the ordinance is repealed. I think a bunch of junk inside a large see through chainlink fence with a couple big ugly dogs and hundreds of stray cats is great for property value. I would probably even dump daily bags of dog/cat food to attract more possums, coons, and cats. If I can afford it, I can do it. Thats the great thing about a capitalist society. The person who can afford to do things he wants to do, gets to do them. If you dont like it, you can either pony up, or shut up.

It just goes to show you that your vote really does matter. If you vote for people who want to control everything and have it their way regardless of public support, you get what you voted for. I don't know why it is a surprise that a democrat wants to control what you do with your property. I watched the clips too - I felt the whole thing was really just another screw you to property owners. Every year it seems that someone, the city, the county, the drainage district, a group of neighbors, someone is attempting to intrude upon private property rights. We have been experiencing a continuous decay in the freedoms we used to enjoy. I don't feel any safer now than I did 10, 12, 15 years ago. How bout you? I guess the public is much safer now that we can not do what we please with our own home. Im currently outside the maps, but my rental property is not. I guess I just got screwed...especially since the house is old and in relatively mediocre condition structurally . Another thing that chaffs my rear end, is the number of houses that are just flat out hideous, non-historic eye sore properties, that are in support of this thing. One of the ugliest houses in the heights, that would not pass any of these "review boards" has signs all of its front and side yard t in support of the historic districts (yellow sign that wants to stop big homes)...where if the historic people had their choice, they would make her tear it down, and replace it without something that fits the neighborhood. The whole way this went down just stinks of dirty politics, and back room dealings.

Wow - those times are incredibly convenient for those of us with jobs. They are certainly making the effort to ensure that nobody gets a say on any of it!

<br /><br /><br />I completely agree here. It was builders who made the heights desirable again. The place was a slum close to town with great freeway access...tucked between 45 and I-10 less than 5 minutes from town...where traffic is consistent. The older historic homes are great, and I acutally love to see them. I love to see the older homes returned to their glory with modern conveniences...what I hate, and I do mean hate is people who try to tell you what to do with your own property! I lived in the suburbs, and I dealt with homeowners associations...I made the decision, that I hated the cookie cutter houses, and the massive amounts of traffic, with people always in your business and homeowners associations telling me what flag I can or cant fly, and what color of window coverings I can have in the front of my house.... I moved to the heights, to get away from the traffic, and people telling me what to do. I intentionally bought a house/lot not encumbered by the stupid restrictive voluntary deed restrictions. When they knocked on my door to get me to sign their petition I told them not a chance....I have dealt with the Heights Association and it was unpleasant. In 2006, I attempted to buy what was then 1422 Tulane St...It had a 700 sqft house that was in need of repair, and a dilapidated "garage" with no doors, and that was falling down. The small house could have been saved, but at 700 sqft, in my opinion it was not worth the effort. However, being that I wanted to build a new house I had intended to keep the small house, and live in it through construction before moving it. I went under contract on that house, and petitioned the association for approval to build a new home on the 6600sq ft that was vacant. The petition was denied, becuase the lot did not meet the restrictions. The restrictions allow 1 house per 6600sq ft lot. 1422 Tulane was 13199sq ft. 1 ft less than what was required to build. The association would not even return a phone call. I emailed back and forth with the attorney that the association used, and got no where. They refuse to bend in even the smallest way. We are talking about 1 ft. I ended up withdrawing from the contract, because they made it clear, I could not build without demolishing the small house, and I had intended to keep it. My experience with home owners associations, deed restrictions, and everything else, is that they are not willing to work with you on anything ever. They get control, and they love the control. The small extremely loud minority of people push their views upon the majority who just want to go about their business undisturbed. If this passes, all it will do is destroy the values that have been built up...I personally bought knowing that I had no restriction...for them to come back and attempt to place restrictions on something that had none, is a fundamental change in the investment I made. If it passes, we will have a whole lot more "Sunday Contractors" who promise to start and complete the work on Sunday and in one day. I am willing to offer my services to anyone who wants to fight this. I am anti-restrictions. The Heights has been improving because there are no restrictions, NOT in spite of that.

I knew the nutria were bad, but I didnt know they decimated wetlands. I will have to aid the alligators in the destruction of the nutria, the same as I do my fields with the destruction of feral hogs...I believe feral hogs are a much more severe problem than the nutria, but thats probably for another thread. In my experience with Alligators, it seems to me that they are primarily opportunity feeders - they will eat when an opportunity arises, regardless of whether or not they are hungry. During alligator season, I have had a single alligator eat 3 chickens in one day, only to be caught on the 4th chicken. There is no way that little 6.5' gator was hungry after eating 3 4lb chickens...but when you let that chicken rot in the sun for 10 days prior to stringing it up, that smell is like heaven to them, and they wont turn down a free meal. I would assume its the same with the nutria. They probably wont hunt one down, but if it happens to be in the area...I would guess that nutria would be dinner regardless of whether the alligator was full or hungry.

Alligators LOVE the nutria. I would think Louisiana would not have much of a nutria problem....My ranch HAD plenty of nutria, then the Hurricane pushed alot more alligators than normal onto our property b/c we were the only freshwater left for a pretty good distance, and low and behold we no longer have a nutria infestation. Though we do still have alot of alligators. Those nutria can get to be about 25lbs or so when there are no predators....we had a huge one on our front pond then one day it was gone, and a 9' alligator was seen. I assume the alligator ate well.

Brilliant! Negative responses to a recommendation of getting involved in your kids lives. What a great society we live in. Let teachers tell them its normal to have sex at 12, give em porn and alcohol, provide them with clean needles so they can do drugs more readily, and by all means, do not interrupt them when they are at your house locked in their rooms doing whatever it is they are doing. Its harmless and they are going to do it anyway...(sarcasm, because the people giving negatives to my last comment probably are not quite intelligent enough to know sarcasm when they read it)

The solution is to improve the quality of what goes into the kdis heads. Being young myself and not having kids yet (29 working on it) I would never in a million years let my kids watch alot of the television out there now, and I certainly will not let them listen to a LARGE majority of the music...my mom said it time and time again till it was ingrained in my head..."trash in, trash out" If all kids get to watch on TV is sex, sex, sex, that will be all they think about and do. Teens are going to think about it anyways, but when its on every show, every commercial, and the main theme of every song, its worse than it would otherwise be. Parents should step up and take some responsibility for their failings, and cure them. Also, parents are deferring to schools for everything, and not doing things with their children in their free time. A teen who is busy doing things that they enjoy are not going to be busy having sex. Teens who have nothing to do, and just sit around thinking about sex will end up having more of it out of bordem more than anything else. Take your kids fishing, take em hunting, take em camping, take them to the theater, take them places that they REALLY enjoy....they will from that point on think about that event, and how they can get to do it again...it will take up the space in their heads...They will still think about sex, and many will still have it, but it will be less, and it will help. Get involved in their lives, society is going to hell in a handbasket, we need to stop the proliferation of trash in every aspect of every day life. Get back to the basics - get em a dog, get em in sports, get em in something other than the couch in front of the tv, computer, or a video game.

Teach the biologic aspects of the act, tell them they are too young to have sex, that if they engage in sex, they will become pregnant. Send them home with homework, to be signed by the parent, about what was discussed that day. Leave it up to the parents what they want their child to learn from a teacher who may or may not teach the subject in a way that you agree with. From there its their parents job to teach them that even though their body can handle the pregnancy they are way too immature, and completely unprepared for the consequences.