My Take: Homeowners’ Associations Operate As Governments. Why Shouldn’t They Be So Treated?
Here’s a SmartMoney.com article on something I’ve been meaning to bring up for quite a while (bold is mine):
Buying a home is already a complex endeavor. Add in the sometimes unfathomable machinations of a homeowners association (HOA) and you enter a realm filled with the potential for misunderstandings that may have legal and financial consequences.
Often, home buyers don’t fully realize the tradeoff they’re making when they move into communities that involve becoming association members, experts say. More than 57 million people live in associations governing everything from large and small condominium developments to subdivisions of single-family homes, according to the Community Associations Institute, a trade group in Alexandria, Va.
“Many people have trouble accepting the fact that decisions will be made by others,” said Mark Pearlstein, a partner with Levenfeld Pearlstein LLC, a Chicago-based law firm that represents associations.
….. Associations provide a number of important benefits including, for instance, landscape maintenance and access to fitness facilities, and their rules often help protect property values. But it’s the horror stories that make the news: Full-blown fights over a homeowner flying a flag, stringing a clothesline or owning a large dog. And in some states associations are within their rights to foreclose on homeowners who respond to disagreements by refusing to pay their dues.
Two common homeowner complaints: Unexpected increases in dues and unwelcome rule changes.
Homeowners are often “surprised about the ability of an association to change the rules,” Pearlstein said.
For instance, recently, to forestall declines in property values, more associations are prohibiting homeowners from renting out their units. “Courts in most states have held that an association can change the rules by a vote of the ownership to restrict or eliminate leasing,” Pearlstein said.
Now, there’s the rub.
I’ll admit to not having sorted all of this out, but some freedom-advocating reactions to the arbitrary nature of HOAs, especially severe after-the-fact restrictions, would include these:
- HOAs are functioning as governments, and quite unaccountable ones at that.
- If they’re going to do that, HOA board members have to run for election — and not the internally-administered kind. I mean the normal government-administered election process at the polls.
- Major changes to HOA rules should also be subject to a formal electoral approval process.
- HOA members not on the HOA boards should have the right to bring forth ballot initiatives.
- Residents not satisfied with the resolution of a dispute need a legally-recognized right to appeal those rulings through the court system instead of being subject to binding arbitration.
I’m sure there’s a lot I’ve missed. I’m not impressed with the argument that “You agreed to it when you bought your house, now you have to live with it.” My view: You agreed to be “governed” by reasonable people, not the petty tyrants and busybodies who have all too often gravitated towards HOA positions.
Since the large majority of new homes and condos are governed (there’s that word again) by the rules (which are for all practical purposes, laws) of HOAs, their actions and somewhat extra-legal nature deserve more scrutiny than they are receiving.
I believe HOAs function as unnacountable de facto governments that need to be reined in. Though I haven’t researched it, I would be not surprised to learn that their “trade group” is into big-league lobbying at the state and federal levels to protect their arbitrary interests. I would also suspect that their power to influence any potential legislation is growing. HOAs not happy with assuming the responsibilities commensurate with their power do have a choice: They can vote to disband. Many of them wouldn’t be missed.
I don’t necessarily see this as a left-right issue, but perhaps others see it differently.
Cross-posted at Wide Open.









